Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Partially Allows Appeal on Transfer Pricing & Deduction Issues for Megasoft Ltd.</h1> <h3>M/s. Meritor LVS India (P) Ltd Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -12 (1), Bangalore</h3> M/s. Meritor LVS India (P) Ltd Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -12 (1), Bangalore - TMI Issues Involved:1. Non-grant of adjustment for risk and exclusion of certain comparables related to Transfer Pricing (TP) issues.2. Exclusion of travel and telecommunication expenditure from export turnover and total turnover for computing the deduction under Section 10A.3. Deduction under Section 10A without setting off brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation of non-eligible units.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Non-grant of adjustment for risk and exclusion of certain comparables related to Transfer Pricing (TP) issues:The assessee's primary contention was the non-grant of adjustment for risk and the exclusion of certain comparables selected by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The TPO had rejected most of the comparables selected by the assessee and included 26 comparables deemed functionally similar. The assessee sought the exclusion of 16 of these comparables, arguing they were functionally different.The Tribunal referred to the decision in the case of Hewlett-Packard (India) Globalsoft P. Ltd, which dealt with similar issues for the same assessment year. The Tribunal cited several reasons for excluding specific comparables, such as Celestial Labs Ltd., E-Zest Solutions Ltd., Infosys Technologies Ltd., KALS Information Systems Ltd., and others, based on their functional dissimilarity, involvement in software products, or lack of segmental data.For instance, Celestial Labs Ltd. was excluded because it was primarily a research and development company, not purely a software development service provider. Similarly, Infosys Technologies Ltd. was excluded due to its substantial revenues from software products and significant research and development expenditure, making it functionally dissimilar to the assessee.The Tribunal ordered the exclusion of the 16 comparables and directed the TPO to rework the Profit Level Indicator (PLI) of Megasoft Ltd. based on its software development services segment only.Regarding the risk adjustment, the TPO had concluded that the risks borne by the comparables and the assessee were similar, thus negating the need for any risk adjustment. The Tribunal upheld this finding, noting that the assessee did not provide sufficient evidence to counter the TPO's conclusions.2. Exclusion of travel and telecommunication expenditure from export turnover and total turnover for computing the deduction under Section 10A:The assessee argued that travel and telecommunication expenditure incurred in foreign currency should not be excluded from the export turnover. Alternatively, if excluded, the same should be excluded from the total turnover as well.The Tribunal referred to the definition of 'export turnover' in Explanation 2 (iv) to Section 10A and concluded that the exclusion of such expenses from export turnover was warranted. However, following the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd, the Tribunal directed that the excluded amounts from export turnover should also be excluded from total turnover while computing the deduction under Section 10A.3. Deduction under Section 10A without setting off brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation of non-eligible units:The assessee contended that the deduction under Section 10A should be allowed without setting off brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation of non-eligible units. The Tribunal referred to the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT (LTU) v. Yokogawa India Ltd, which supported the assessee's view. Consequently, the Tribunal directed that the deduction under Section 10A be granted without such set-off.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal ordering the exclusion of specific comparables, directing the TPO to rework the PLI for Megasoft Ltd., and granting the deduction under Section 10A without setting off brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation of non-eligible units. The Tribunal also directed the exclusion of travel and telecommunication expenses from both export turnover and total turnover for the deduction computation.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found