Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search βœ•
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
β•³
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
βœ•
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close βœ•
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

        <h1>Tribunal directs exclusion of comparables for ITeS services, orders re-evaluation for R&D</h1> The appeal was partly allowed. The Tribunal directed the exclusion of certain comparable entities for ITeS services and restored the matter of specific ... TP Adjustment - comparable selection - HELD THAT:- Accentia Technologies Ltd.- A copy of the order of Ld.DRP has been placed on record. The Ld. DR could not controvert the said factual matrix. Upon perusal of assessee’s TP study, as placed on record, we find that the assessee was engaged in providing application support, analytical support, R&D support to its AE. Assessee was responsible for identification of resources, recruitment of manpower, training, project management and execution. These services were characterized as routine support services with less than normal business risk. These services, in our considered opinion, could not be equated with the functions performed by Accentia. This is further evidenced by the fact that in immediately AY 2011-12, Ld. DRP excluded this entity on functional dissimilarity. Keeping in view the fact that nothing on record suggest that there was any change in functional profile of the assessee or the said entity, we direct for exclusion of this entity. Nothing has been brought on record to suggest that the revenue contested the aforesaid stand of Ld. DRP, in any manner. Eclerx Services Ltd.- As observed that during the year, this entity had acquired Agilyst Inc., a US company providing operations and a tantalizing support to some of the largest cable and telecommunications companies in the world. Respectfully following the same, holding that scale of operation was a significant criterion for the purpose of benchmarking analysis and finding that this entity was functionally dissimilar, we direct for exclusion of this comparable. Infosys BPO Ltd.- As relying on PENTAIR WATER INDIA (P) LTD. [2014 (5) TMI 1068 - ITAT PANAJI] exclusion of this entity on account of functional dissimilarity and extra-ordinary events which took place during the year. TCS E-serve Ltd.entity has been directed to be excluded since it was engaged in providing high end KPO services. Secondly, applying the scale of operation criteria as approved by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd. [2014 (5) TMI 1068 - ITAT PANAJI] we direct for exclusion of this entity. Cross Domain Solutions Pvt. Ltd.- DRP has relied upon the decision of Hyderabad Tribunal rendered in M/s Excellence Data Research Pvt. Ltd. [2014 (9) TMI 126 - ITAT HYDERABAD] wherein the nature of the services was found to be similar to ITeS filed. The cited decision of Bangalore Tribunal pertains to AY 2008-09 and therefore, would not throw much light on the nature of services being rendered by this entity. Therefore, we deem it fit to restore the matter back to Ld. AO / Ld. TPO to appreciate the functional profile of this entity and re-adjudicate the same as urged by Ld. AR with a direction to the assessee to substantiate the same. Oxygen Bio Research - We direct Ld. TPO / Ld. AO to consider Profit Before Depreciation for the purpose of benchmarking analysis. Syngene International Ltd - AR submitted that this company was found functionally non-comparable and wrongly included in the final list of comparable. It has been submitted that RPT of this entity is greater than 25% and therefore, the same would not be a good comparable - Upon perusal, we find that the assessee’s submissions would require verification and therefore, we deem it fit to restore the matter of this comparable to the file of Ld. TPO / Ld. AO for re-adjudication in the light of submissions made by Ld. AR. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate the same. Issues Involved:1. Inclusion/Exclusion of Comparable Entities for Corporate/Back Office Support Services (ITeS Services)2. Inclusion/Exclusion of Comparable Entities for R&D ServicesDetailed Analysis:I. Corporate/Back Office Support Services (ITeS Services):1. Wrong Comparable and High Arithmetic Mean:- The assessee contested the high arithmetic mean of 22.90% derived by the AO/DRP using wrong comparable entities, as opposed to the assessee’s margin of 11.85%. The AO applied new filters and identified 10 comparable entities, resulting in a mean margin of 24.96%, adjusted to 22.90% after working capital adjustments.2. Adjustment u/s 92CA:- The AO made a TP adjustment of Rs. 93,05,870/- to the price received by the appellant. The final assessment order reflected a net TP adjustment of Rs. 143.59 Lacs.3. Exclusion of Specific Comparable Entities:- The assessee argued for the exclusion of Accentia Technologies Ltd., Eclerx Services Ltd., Infosys BPO Ltd., TCS E-serve Ltd., and Cross Domain Solutions Pvt. Ltd. based on functional dissimilarity. The Tribunal directed the exclusion of these entities due to significant differences in scale, functional profile, and extraordinary events affecting their operations.4. Accentia Technologies Ltd.:- Excluded due to functional dissimilarity, as it was involved in healthcare documentation and receivables management, not akin to the ITeS services provided by the assessee.5. Eclerx Services Ltd.:- Excluded due to its operating income being 51 times that of the assessee and an extraordinary event of acquiring Agilyst Inc.6. Infosys BPO Ltd.:- Excluded due to its operating income being 138 times that of the assessee and the acquisition of Portland Group Pty. Ltd.7. TCS E-serve Ltd.:- Excluded as it provided high-end KPO services and had a significantly larger scale of operations.8. Cross Domain Solutions Pvt. Ltd.:- The matter was restored to the AO/TPO for re-evaluation of its functional profile as the entity provided diversified KPO services.II. Contract Research & Development Services:1. Wrong Comparable and High Arithmetic Mean:- The assessee contested the high arithmetic mean of 19.30% derived by the AO/DRP using wrong comparable entities, as opposed to the assessee’s margin of 12%. The AO identified 5 fresh comparable entities, resulting in a TP adjustment of Rs. 72.32 Lacs.2. Adjustment u/s 92CA:- The AO made a TP adjustment of Rs. 50,53,176/- to the price received by the appellant.3. Exclusion of Specific Comparable Entities:- The assessee argued for the exclusion of Oxygen Bio Research Pvt. Ltd. and Syngene International Ltd. based on functional dissimilarity and other factors.4. Oxygen Bio Research Pvt. Ltd.:- The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of this entity, rejecting the assessee’s arguments regarding the unavailability of the annual report, acquisition by another entity, and change in depreciation policy. However, the Tribunal directed the AO to consider Profit Before Depreciation for benchmarking analysis.5. Syngene International Ltd.:- The matter was restored to the AO/TPO for re-evaluation of its functional profile and verification of the assessee’s submissions regarding its related party transactions and operating income.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed. The Tribunal directed the exclusion of certain comparable entities for ITeS services and restored the matter of specific comparable entities for R&D services to the AO/TPO for re-evaluation. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of functional similarity and scale of operations in selecting comparable entities for transfer pricing analysis.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found