Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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
  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
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        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

        Tribunal directs exclusion of comparables, reconsiders notional interest, and verifies TDS deduction.

        Salesforce. com India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-6 (1) (1), Bengaluru.

        Salesforce. com India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-6 (1) (1), Bengaluru. - TMI Issues Involved:

        1. Transfer Pricing Matters
        2. Grounds for Imputation of Notional Interest on Outstanding Receivables
        3. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act

        Detailed Analysis:

        Transfer Pricing Matters:

        1. Adjustment to Transfer Price:
        - The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) confirmed the adjustment of Rs. 26,548,569 for software development services, Rs. 102,622,022 for marketing and sales support services, and Rs. 113,123 for notional interest on outstanding receivables.
        - The assessee contested the rejection of its Transfer Pricing (TP) documentation and comparability analysis by the Assessing Officer (AO) and Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The TPO conducted a fresh comparability analysis using additional filters and non-contemporaneous data.
        - The TPO included companies like Infosys Limited, Persistent Systems Limited, and others, which the assessee argued were functionally different. The TPO excluded companies the assessee considered comparable.

        2. Exclusion of Certain Comparables:
        - The Tribunal excluded Infosys Limited, Persistent Systems Limited, Thirdware Solutions Limited, Mindtree Limited, Larsen & Toubro Infotech Limited, and Cigniti Technologies Ltd. from the final list of comparables for the software development services segment due to functional dissimilarity and other reasons.
        - For the marketing and sales support services segment, I Media Corp Limited, Irunway India Pvt. Ltd., and Killick Agencies & Marketing Limited were excluded for reasons such as extraordinary events, functional dissimilarity, and significant related party transactions.

        3. Inclusion of Certain Comparables:
        - The Tribunal remanded the inclusion of I2T2 India Ltd., Kireeti Soft Technologies Ltd., Exiliant Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Celstream Technologies Ltd., and Evoke Technologies Ltd. for the software development services segment to the AO/TPO for verification.
        - For the marketing and sales support services segment, Concept Public Relation India Ltd. and MCI Management India Ltd. were also remanded to the AO/TPO for reconsideration.

        Grounds for Imputation of Notional Interest on Outstanding Receivables:

        1. Independent International Transaction:
        - The TPO considered overdue receivables from Associated Enterprises (AEs) as a separate international transaction under Section 92B of the Act and computed interest using LIBOR + 300 basis points.
        - The Tribunal noted that the working capital adjustment should subsume the receivables. Referring to the Special Bench decision in Instrumentation Corpn. Ltd. and the Delhi High Court's decision in Orange Business Services India Solutions (P.) Ltd., the Tribunal set aside the issue and remitted it to the AO/TPO for fresh consideration.

        Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act:

        1. Verification of TDS Deduction:
        - The AO disallowed Rs. 24,586,946 under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on certain expenses.
        - The assessee claimed that TDS was deducted and deposited with the government. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the AO for verification of the TDS deduction and deposit.

        Conclusion:

        - The Tribunal directed the AO/TPO to exclude certain comparables and reconsider others based on functional similarity and compliance with filters.
        - The issue of notional interest on outstanding receivables was remanded for fresh consideration, taking into account the working capital adjustment.
        - The disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was remanded for verification of TDS deduction and deposit.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found