2015 (10) TMI 2180 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal affirms CIT (A) order on deduction computation, TP adjustment, and judicial precedent

The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A) order in a case involving the computation of deduction u/s.10A without setting off losses of units and the consideration ... Computation of deduction u/s.10A without setting off the losses of units on which 10A has not been claimed as directed by CIT(A) - Held that:- CIT (A) had followed the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd [2011 (8) TMI 845 - Karnataka High Court]. Revenue's decision to move an appeal before Hon'ble Apex Court against this judgment will not be a reason not to follow this judgment. Similarly acceptance of a judgment of the High Courts or orders of this Tribunal are irrelevant since all parties are under law obliged and duty-bound to follow them. - Decided against revenue Transfer pricing adjustment - CIT(A) directing the AO to re-compute mean margin and work out the quantum of TP adjustment - CIT(A) directing the AO to consider current year data for comparable M/s Net Axis Software Services Ltd and to consider M/s. Dynacons Solutions & Systems Ltd as comparable - Held that:- If financial data for relevant previous years were available in public domain, it could be considered as good comparables. CIT(A)'s direction was only to verify this aspect. He did not limit the power of the AO / TPO to consider their comparability on their yardsticks. We are of the opinion that order of CIT (A) does not suffer from any ambiguity and was fair and appropriate in the circumstances of the case - Decided against revenue Issues:1. Computation of deduction u/s.10A without setting off losses of units.2. Consideration of companies as comparables for TP adjustment.Issue 1: Computation of deduction u/s.10A without setting off losses of units:The Revenue appealed against the CIT (A) order concerning the computation of deduction u/s.10A without setting off losses of units. The Revenue argued that the deduction u/s.10A should be allowed from the total income of the assessee after setting off losses from one source against income from other sources under the same head of income. The CIT (A) followed the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd, which the Revenue challenged by moving an appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court. However, the Tribunal held that the acceptance or non-acceptance of judgments by parties is irrelevant, as all parties are obligated to follow them. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed grounds 2 and 3 raised by the Revenue.Issue 2: Consideration of companies as comparables for TP adjustment:The Revenue contested the CIT (A) directive to consider M/s. Net Axis Software Services Ltd and M/s. Dynacons Solutions & Systems Ltd as comparables for analyzing the value of international transactions. The CIT (A) directed the AO to re-compute the mean operating margin and work out the quantum of TP adjustment if required based on the financial data available for these companies. The Revenue argued that the financial data for these companies was not available in the public domain. However, the Tribunal noted that the CIT (A) did not limit the power of the AO/TPO to consider comparability based on their yardsticks and that the CIT (A)'s order was fair and appropriate. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed grounds 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT (A) order on both issues related to the computation of deduction u/s.10A and the consideration of companies as comparables for TP adjustment. The Tribunal emphasized the obligation of all parties to abide by judicial decisions and affirmed the fairness and appropriateness of the CIT (A)'s directives in the circumstances of the case.