Appeal partly allowed, adjustments to Arm's Length Price & 10A deduction ordered. Certain comparables excluded.

The appeal was partly allowed, directing the Transfer Pricing Officer/Appellate Officer to recompute the Arm's Length Price after excluding certain comparables and considering risk adjustments. The computation of deduction under section 10A of the Income Tax Act was to be adjusted as per the tribunal's directions. Other grounds not pressed by the assessee were dismissed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Selection and exclusion of comparables for Transfer Pricing.
2. Risk adjustment consideration.
3. Computation of deduction under section 10A of the I.T. Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Selection and Exclusion of Comparables for Transfer Pricing:

1.1. Accepted Comparables:
The assessee accepted the selection of 16 comparables by the TPO, including Datamatics Ltd., E-Zest Solutions Ltd., and others.

1.2. Disputed Comparables:
The assessee objected to the inclusion of the following comparables:
- Avani Cimcon Technologies Ltd.: Excluded due to revenue from both product and software services without segmental data and supernormal profits. Previous tribunal decisions supported exclusion.
- Infosys Technologies Ltd.: Excluded due to its size, turnover, brand value, and diversified activities. Tribunal and Delhi High Court decisions supported exclusion.
- Ishir Infotech Ltd.: Excluded for failing the employee cost filter. Previous tribunal decisions supported exclusion.
- Lucid Software Ltd.: Excluded due to lack of segmental data for product and software services. Previous tribunal decisions supported exclusion.
- MEGASOFT Ltd.: Only segmental margin from software development services considered. Previous tribunal decisions supported this approach.
- Tata Elxsi Ltd.: Excluded due to its complex nature of business and lack of segmental details. Previous tribunal decisions supported exclusion.
- Wipro Ltd.: Excluded due to its size, brand value, and diversified activities. Previous tribunal decisions supported exclusion.
- Accel Transmatic Ltd.: Excluded due to its diversified business activities. Previous tribunal decisions supported exclusion.
- Kals Information Systems Ltd.: Excluded due to functional differences and failing the salary cost filter. Previous tribunal decisions supported exclusion.

1.3. Rejected Comparables by TPO:
The assessee's request to include Aztec Soft Ltd., Birla Technologies Ltd., Indium Software India Ltd., Larsen & Toubro Infotech, PSI Data Systems Ltd., and VMF Softech Ltd. was denied. The TPO and DRP found these comparables functionally dissimilar or having related party transactions.

2. Risk Adjustment Consideration:
The assessee requested risk adjustment due to single customer risk versus market risk of comparables. The TPO initially denied this, but the tribunal directed a fresh examination of the issue by the TPO, considering the exclusion of certain comparables.

3. Computation of Deduction under Section 10A of the I.T. Act:
The issue involved the reduction of communication charges from export turnover but not from total turnover. The tribunal directed the A.O. to reduce the communication charges from both export and total turnover, following the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and ITAT Special Bench.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed, directing the TPO/A.O. to recompute the ALP after excluding certain comparables and considering risk adjustments. The computation of deduction under section 10A was to be adjusted as per the tribunal's directions. Other grounds not pressed by the assessee were dismissed.

---