Tribunal grants partial relief in tax appeals, directs reassessment for arm's length price & deductions

The Tribunal partly allowed both appeals for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, directing the Assessing Officer to re-determine the arm's length price and compute deductions under section 10A. Specific directions were given for the exclusion of certain companies as comparables, reduction of communication charges from export turnover, non-consideration of certain amounts in export turnover, and credit of advance tax and TDS, with remittances for further verification.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Transfer Pricing Adjustments
2. Exclusion of Certain Companies as Comparables
3. Reduction of Communication Charges from Export Turnover
4. Non-consideration of Certain Amounts in Export Turnover
5. Credit of Advance Tax and TDS

Detailed Analysis:

1. Transfer Pricing Adjustments:
The assessee, engaged in providing IT-enabled back office support services, filed its return of income for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) rejected the assessee's transfer pricing study and selected 27 companies as comparables, resulting in an upward adjustment of Rs. 13,08,64,590. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) upheld the TPO's findings, leading the assessee to appeal.

2. Exclusion of Certain Companies as Comparables:
Mold-Tek Technologies Ltd.:
The assessee objected to Mold-Tek due to its abnormally high profit margin and functional dissimilarity. The Tribunal agreed, citing previous decisions and the DRP's exclusion of Mold-Tek for the assessment year 2008-09.

Eclerx Services Ltd.:
The Tribunal found Eclerx to be functionally dissimilar and having super normal profit, following the precedent set in Capital IQ Information Systems (India) P. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT.

Accurate Data Converters P. Ltd.:
The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer (AO) as the TPO had not given the assessee an opportunity to object to this company being selected as a comparable.

Vishal Information Technologies Ltd.:
The Tribunal directed the exclusion of Vishal Information Technologies, citing its functional differences and reliance on third-party vendors, as established in previous Tribunal decisions.

HCL Comnet Systems & Services Ltd.:
The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the AO due to the lack of information provided to the assessee and the company's related party transactions exceeding 21.52% of the revenue.

Maple e Solution Ltd. & Triton Corp Ltd.:
The Tribunal excluded these companies due to the involvement of their directors in fraud, making their financial results unreliable.

Infosys BPO Ltd. and Wipro Ltd. (Seg.):
The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of these companies as comparables, rejecting the assessee's argument about their high turnover, given the assessee's own substantial turnover.

Geneysis International Corporation Ltd.:
The Tribunal remitted the issue to the AO to reconsider the functional dissimilarity and the impact of provisions for doubtful debts on operating expenses.

Accentia Technologies Ltd.:
The Tribunal remitted the issue to the AO to verify the impact of amalgamation and acquisition on the company's financial results and its functional comparability.

3. Reduction of Communication Charges from Export Turnover:
The assessee challenged the reduction of communication charges from export turnover for computing deduction under section 10A. The Tribunal directed the AO to reduce the communication charges from both export turnover and total turnover, following the decisions in Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. and ITO v. Sak Soft Ltd.

4. Non-consideration of Certain Amounts in Export Turnover:
The assessee claimed that Rs. 10,80,43,605 was not considered in the export turnover for computing deduction under section 10A. The Tribunal remitted the issue to the AO for verification and appropriate action.

5. Credit of Advance Tax and TDS:
The assessee raised the issue of not granting credit for advance tax and TDS amounting to Rs. 3,73,97,845. The Tribunal remitted the issue to the AO for verification and appropriate action.

Conclusion:
Both appeals, I.T.A. No. 2106/Hyd/11 for the assessment year 2007-08 and I.T.A. No. 1864/Hyd/11 for the assessment year 2008-09, were partly allowed. The Tribunal directed the AO to re-determine the arm's length price and compute deductions under section 10A, considering the specific directions and remittances for further verification.

---