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 adjusts transfer pricing, tax deductions, and revenue appeal outcome.</h1> <h3>M/s. e4e Business Solutions India Pvt Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 11 (3), Bangalore.</h3> M/s. e4e Business Solutions India Pvt Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 11 (3), Bangalore. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Transfer Pricing matters.2. Corporate tax matters.Detailed Analysis:Transfer Pricing Matters:1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:- The assessee argued that the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) was prejudicial and violated principles of natural justice.- The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue, as it was general in nature.2. Arm's Length Price Determination:- The Tribunal reviewed the Transfer Pricing Officer's (TPO) methods, including the use of non-contemporaneous data and rejection of comparable companies.- The TPO's fresh benchmarking analysis and selection of comparables were contested by the assessee, particularly the inclusion of companies not functionally similar.3. Re-computation of Operating Profit:- The Tribunal addressed the exclusion of foreign exchange gains from the operating profit margin.- It was held that foreign exchange gains related to the service provided to the Associated Enterprise (AE) should be included in the operating profit margin.- The Tribunal directed the TPO to re-compute the margins by including foreign exchange gains and excluding other incomes like interest.4. Functional Comparability of Selected Companies:- The Tribunal examined the functional comparability of four companies: Accentia Technologies Ltd., Eclerx Services Ltd., Infosys BPO Ltd., and Cosmic Global Ltd.- Accentia Technologies Ltd.: Rejected due to functional dissimilarity and involvement in healthcare activities.- Eclerx Services Ltd.: Rejected as it provided high-end KPO services, unlike the assessee's low-end BPO services.- Infosys BPO Ltd.: Rejected due to an extraordinary event of amalgamation and functional dissimilarity.- Cosmic Global Ltd.: Rejected as its major revenue came from translation services, which were outsourced.5. Use of Contemporaneous Data:- The Tribunal upheld the TPO's approach of using current year data for comparability instead of multiple year/prior year data used by the assessee.6. Adjustments under Rule 10B:- The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue as the assessee did not press it during the hearing.7. Benefit of Proviso to Section 92C(2):- The Tribunal directed the TPO to consider the benefit of tolerance range +/-5% as per the proviso to Section 92C.Corporate Tax Matters:1. Reduction of Travel Expenses from Export Turnover:- The Tribunal addressed the issue of reducing travel expenses incurred in foreign currency from the export turnover while computing the deduction under Section 10A.- The Tribunal followed the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd., which held that expenses excluded from the numerator (export turnover) should also be excluded from the denominator (total turnover) to maintain uniformity.- The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s direction to reduce the travel expenses from both the export turnover and the total turnover.Conclusion:- The assessee's appeal was partly allowed, with directions to re-compute the ALP after excluding certain comparables and including foreign exchange gains in the operating profit.- The revenue's appeal was dismissed, upholding the CIT(A)'s directions regarding the computation of deduction under Section 10A.
TaxTMI 