Tribunal decision on transfer pricing adjustments for IT Services: Directions upheld, violations found, companies excluded, issue remanded.

The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal regarding transfer pricing adjustments for IT Enabled Services. It upheld certain directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) but found violations in the selection of comparable companies. The Tribunal directed the exclusion of specific companies due to functional dissimilarities and remanded one issue for further verification. The final assessment order was not quashed, and the decision was rendered on 18th June 2021.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Addition under section 92CA(3) for IT Enabled Services (ITes)
2. Disregarding benchmarking analysis and comparable companies by the assessee
3. Validity of directions issued by DRP under section 144C
4. Rejection and selection of comparable companies by DRP

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition under section 92CA(3) for IT Enabled Services (ITes):
The assessee contested the addition of INR 42,152,857 made under section 92CA(3) concerning ITes provided to its Associated Enterprise (AE). The Tribunal observed that the DRP's directions for two comparable companies, Insync Analytics (India) Private Limited and Manipal Digital Systems Private Limited, violated Section 144C(8) of the Act, which prohibits setting aside any proposed variation or issuing directions for further inquiry to the AO/TPO. However, the Tribunal upheld the other directions of the DRP and dismissed the assessee's prayer to quash the entire final assessment order.

2. Disregarding benchmarking analysis and comparable companies by the assessee:
The assessee argued that the DRP disregarded its benchmarking analysis and the comparable companies selected based on contemporaneous data in the transfer pricing study report. The Tribunal analyzed the functional profiles of the companies involved and found that the DRP and TPO had not adequately justified the inclusion of certain companies as comparables. The Tribunal directed the exclusion of Manipal Digital Systems Private Limited, CES Limited, MPS Limited, and Domex E-Data Pvt. Ltd. from the final set of comparables due to functional dissimilarities with the assessee.

3. Validity of directions issued by DRP under section 144C:
The assessee challenged the validity of the DRP's directions, claiming they were issued in violation of Section 144C of the Act. The Tribunal noted that the DRP's directions concerning Insync Analytics (India) Private Limited and Manipal Digital Systems Private Limited were indeed in violation of Section 144C(8). However, the Tribunal concluded that this violation did not invalidate the other findings of the DRP, and thus, the entire final assessment order could not be quashed.

4. Rejection and selection of comparable companies by DRP:
The Tribunal scrutinized the selection and rejection of comparable companies by the DRP:
- Manipal Digital Systems Private Limited: The Tribunal found that this company was functionally different from the assessee, as it was involved in pre-press activities and diverse services not comparable to the assessee's ITes. The Tribunal directed its exclusion.
- CES Limited: The Tribunal noted that CES Limited was engaged in both BPO and KPO activities, whereas the assessee was primarily a call center. Following the Delhi High Court's decision in Rampgreen Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, the Tribunal directed the exclusion of CES Limited.
- MPS Limited: The Tribunal observed that MPS Limited was engaged in high-end activities akin to IT services rather than ITes. Citing previous Tribunal decisions, the Tribunal directed the exclusion of MPS Limited.
- Domex E-Data Pvt. Ltd.: The Tribunal found that Domex E-Data Pvt. Ltd. was primarily a KPO company, functionally different from the assessee. The Tribunal directed its exclusion.
- e4e Healthcare Business Services Pvt. Ltd.: The Tribunal remanded the issue back to the AO/TPO for verification of functional compatibility, as the assessee contested the RPT filter applied by the TPO.
- Informed Technologies India Limited: The assessee did not press for the inclusion of this company, and thus, the Tribunal dismissed this part of the ground.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing the exclusion of certain companies from the final set of comparables and remanding the issue of e4e Healthcare Business Services Pvt. Ltd. back to the AO/TPO for further verification. The order was pronounced on 18th June 2021.

---