TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tax Appeal Partially Allowed with Directions on Arm's Length Price & Business Income Set-Off</h1> <h3>M/s. Mindteck (India) Ltd. Versus The Income Tax Officer, Circle 12 (1), Bangalore.</h3> M/s. Mindteck (India) Ltd. Versus The Income Tax Officer, Circle 12 (1), Bangalore. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP).2. Exclusion of foreign currency expenses and communication charges from export turnover/total turnover.3. Set-off of current year unabsorbed depreciation against the adjustment made to business income.Issue 1: Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of determination of ALPThe Assessee, engaged in software development services, reported a transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AE) and claimed the price charged was at arm's length. The Assessee used the Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method (CUP), which was rejected by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) who adopted the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). The TPO selected 26 comparables and calculated an arithmetic mean of 25.14%, resulting in a transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 3,54,51,200.The Tribunal considered the comparables and determined that certain companies with turnovers exceeding Rs. 200 crores should be excluded, following the precedent set in Trilogy E-Business Software India Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal also excluded companies not functionally comparable, such as KALS Information Systems Limited and Accel Transmatic Limited, based on their involvement in software products and other services. Megasoft Ltd. was considered only for its software service segment, and Lucid Software Limited was excluded due to its involvement in product development. Companies with related party transactions exceeding 15% were also excluded.The Tribunal directed the TPO to recompute the ALP after excluding the identified non-comparable companies.Issue 2: Exclusion of foreign currency expenses and communication charges from export turnover/total turnoverThe Assessee contested the exclusion of travel expenses in foreign currency and communication expenses from export turnover while computing the deduction under section 10A. The Tribunal, referencing the Karnataka High Court decision in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd, directed the Assessing Officer to exclude these expenses from both export turnover and total turnover.Issue 3: Set-off of current year unabsorbed depreciation against the adjustment made to business incomeThe Assessee claimed set-off of current year unabsorbed depreciation against the adjustments made to business income. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify the Assessee's claim and provide consequential relief if the claim was found to be correct.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with directions to the Assessing Officer to recompute the ALP by excluding non-comparable companies, adjust export turnover and total turnover for foreign currency and communication expenses, and verify the set-off of unabsorbed depreciation.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
