Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

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
  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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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

        <h1>Tribunal rules in favor of assessee, excludes contested comparables, and resolves transfer pricing issue.</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, excluding certain contested comparables from the final list and resolving the transfer pricing adjustment ... TP Adjustment - international transaction of provision of software development services - comparable selection - functional similarity - HELD THAT:- Cybermate Infotek Ltd. being engaged in both sale of software products and also providing software development services and in the absence of any segmental details of two divisions being available, the margins of said concern cannot be applied in order to benchmark arm's length price of international transactions undertaken by the assessee, which was solely engaged in providing software development services. Cybercom Datamatics Information Solutions Ltd. also cannot be included in final list of comparables while benchmarking international transactions of assessee of providing software development services to its associated enterprises. Infobeans Systems Pvt. Ltd. is also not to be included in the final list of comparables as the financials of said concern clearly reflect that in addition to providing software development services to its associated enterprises, it had also earned foreign exchange from export of goods on FOB basis. The event of export of goods was also mentioned in notes and also in the Profit and Loss Account, where revenue from sale of software was declared. The segmental details of two activities carried on by the said concern were not available and in the absence of the same, the concern could not be equated as functionally comparable to a concern which was providing software development services to its associated enterprises Thirdware Solutions Ltd not functionally comparable to the assessee E-Zest Solutions Ltd. cannot be held to be functionally comparable to the assessee as it was engaged in provision of KPO services. Accordingly, we hold that concerns Cybercom Datamatics Information Solutions Ltd., Cybermate Infotek Ltd., Thirdware Solutions Ltd., Infobeans Systems Pvt. Ltd. and E-Zest Solutions Ltd. are to be excluded from final list of comparables while benchmarking international transactions undertaken by assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Assessment of total income.2. Transfer pricing adjustment under Chapter X of the Income-tax Act in respect of international transactions for software development services.3. Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Assessment of Total Income:The assessee contested the assessment of total income at Rs. 810,769,315 against the declared income of Rs. 602,526,660. This discrepancy arose from the adjustments made by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and the Assessing Officer (AO).2. Transfer Pricing Adjustment:The primary issue revolved around the transfer pricing adjustments made concerning the international transaction of software development services provided by the assessee to its associated enterprise (AE), SunGard International INC, amounting to Rs. 39.10 crores. The assessee applied the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) and determined the Profit Level Indicator (PLI) on Operating Profit/Operating Cost at 17.80%. The assessee selected certain comparable companies, and since the mean margins of these comparables were within +/- 5% of the assessee's margins, the arm's length price was considered nil.However, the TPO revised the filters and selected a different set of comparables, leading to an upward adjustment of Rs. 37.31 crores. The AO issued a draft assessment order, and after the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) directions, an upward adjustment of Rs. 20.82 crores was made in the final assessment order.The assessee challenged the inclusion of certain companies as comparables:- Cybermate Infotek Ltd.: The Tribunal held that Cybermate Infotek Ltd. was engaged in both software development services and product development without segmental details, making it non-comparable.- Cybercom Datamatics Information Solutions Ltd.: This company was also a product company and provided software development services without segmental details, thus non-comparable.- Infobeans Systems Pvt. Ltd.: It earned foreign exchange from export of goods on FOB basis and had undergone an extraordinary event of demerger, making it non-comparable.- Thirdware Solutions Ltd.: It derived revenue from the sale of licenses, software services export from SEZ units, and subscriptions, and owned intangibles without segmental details, thus non-comparable.- E-Zest Solutions Ltd.: This company provided Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) services, and following the Tribunal's and Delhi High Court's reasoning, it was held non-comparable to the assessee's software development services.The Tribunal excluded these companies from the final list of comparables, leading to the allowance of the assessee's appeal on this ground. Consequently, other grounds of appeal became academic and were dismissed.3. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings:The initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income was also contested. However, since the primary issue of transfer pricing adjustment was resolved in favor of the assessee, this ground was not addressed in detail.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, excluding the contested comparables from the final list and resolving the transfer pricing adjustment issue in favor of the assessee. The other grounds of appeal were dismissed as academic. The order was pronounced on May 17, 2019.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found