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>Tribunal Directs Adjustments & Verifications, Upholds Deduction, Rejects Comparables</h1> <h3>American Express (I) P. Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle-2 (2), New Delhi.</h3> American Express (I) P. Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle-2 (2), New Delhi. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 71,35,97,820/-2. Deduction u/s 10A of Rs. 49,93,98,378/-3. Inclusion and exclusion of certain comparables4. Interest on credit period granted by the company5. Interchanged operating profit/operating cost margins6. Full credit of TDSDetailed Analysis:1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment of Rs. 71,35,97,820/-:The assessee, engaged in providing travel-related services, filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 2,42,82,74,285/- for AY 2010-11. The TPO suggested an adjustment of Rs. 114,75,06,127/- to the income, later reduced by the AO to Rs. 71,35,97,820/-. The assessee challenged the inclusion of five comparables (eClerx Services Ltd., Infosys BPO Ltd., Accentia Technologies Ltd., TCS e-serve Ltd., and TCS e-serve International Ltd.) and the exclusion of four comparables (R. Systems International Ltd., CG Vak Software Exports Ltd., Informed Technologies Ltd., and Micro Genetics Systems Ltd.).2. Deduction u/s 10A of Rs. 49,93,98,378/-:The AO withdrew the deduction u/s 10A for the AEGSC (STP) Unit set up in FY 2002-03, claiming it was established by splitting an existing business. The Tribunal, following its earlier decisions, directed the AO to allow the deduction, emphasizing that the unit was recognized as a new one in previous assessments.3. Inclusion and Exclusion of Certain Comparables:- eClerx Services Ltd.: Rejected due to functional dissimilarity, abnormal revenue fluctuations, and lack of segmental data. The Tribunal upheld its exclusion, noting its KPO nature and entrepreneurial risks.- Infosys BPO Ltd., Accentia Technologies Ltd., TCS e-serve Ltd., TCS e-serve International Ltd.: Excluded due to diversified activities, extraordinary events during the financial year, and lack of segmental data. The Tribunal cited previous cases and jurisdictional High Court decisions supporting the exclusion of these entities.- R. Systems International Ltd.: Initially rejected due to a different financial year ending. The Tribunal directed the AO to consider quarterly results and work out the proportionate profit margin.- CG Vak Software Exports Ltd.: Rejected due to low ITeS segment revenue. The Tribunal directed the TPO to reconsider its inclusion based on functional similarity.- Informed Technologies Ltd. and Micro Genetics Systems Ltd.: Rejected due to sales below Rs. 5 Crores. The Tribunal directed their inclusion, emphasizing functional similarity over turnover.4. Interest on Credit Period Granted by the Company:The Tribunal ruled that if working capital adjustment is granted, no separate adjustment for interest receivables is required, citing the Delhi High Court's decision in Kusum Healthcare P. Ltd.5. Interchanged Operating Profit/Operating Cost Margins:The Tribunal acknowledged the error in interchanging the operating profit/operating cost margins of eClerx Services Ltd. and Omega Healthcare Management Services P. Ltd. and directed the TPO/AO to rectify the mistake.6. Full Credit of TDS:The Tribunal directed the AO to verify the credit of TDS and allow the same to the assessee as claimed in the return.Conclusion:The appeal was allowed, with the Tribunal directing necessary adjustments and verifications, ensuring the inclusion/exclusion of appropriate comparables, rectification of errors, and granting of deductions and TDS credits as per the assessee's claims.
TaxTMI 