Tribunal Directs Exclusion & Inclusion of Comparable Companies, Emphasizes Correct PLI Computation

The Tribunal directed the exclusion of Cybermate Infotek Ltd. from the list of comparables due to its mixed nature of operations and lack of segmental information. It emphasized the correct computation of the Profit Level Indicator (PLI) for Acropetal Technologies Ltd. and directed the adoption of the operating profit as per the DRP's directions. Additionally, the Tribunal found the Assessing Officer's exclusion of Comp-u-Learn Tech India Limited (CTIL) based on a new filter to be impermissible and directed its inclusion in the list of comparables. The matter was remitted to the AO for a fresh determination of the arm's length price, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Inclusion of Cybermate Infotek Ltd. as a comparable.
2. Correct computation of Profit Level Indicator (PLI) for Acropetal Technologies Ltd.
3. Inclusion of Comp-u-Learn Tech India Limited (CTIL) as a comparable.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Inclusion of Cybermate Infotek Ltd. as a Comparable:
The assessee objected to the inclusion of Cybermate Infotek Ltd. by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) on the grounds that it developed its own 38 software products. The TPO and the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) did not find merit in this objection and included the company in the list of comparables. However, the Tribunal analyzed the nature of services rendered by the assessee, which involved software development and support services exclusively for its parent company without any developed software products for commercial exploitation. The Tribunal examined the balance sheet and other financial details of the assessee, confirming that it did not hold any intangible assets or capital work-in-progress, indicating it was not a software product company. Conversely, Cybermate Infotek Ltd. was found to be engaged in both software development services and product development with significant inventories, capital work-in-progress, and intangible assets. Due to the mixed nature of Cybermate Infotek Ltd.'s operations and the absence of segmental information, the Tribunal directed its exclusion from the list of comparables.

2. Correct Computation of Profit Level Indicator (PLI) for Acropetal Technologies Ltd.:
The dispute regarding Acropetal Technologies Ltd. was not about its inclusion but the correct computation of its PLI. The assessee computed the PLI on a segment basis at 4.66%, while the TPO initially computed it at 29.62%. The DRP identified mistakes in the TPO's computation and directed the adoption of segmental operating profit at Rs. 11.83 crore. However, the Assessing Officer (AO), while giving effect to the DRP's directions, incorrectly computed the operating profit at Rs. 22.26 crore, resulting in a PLI of 20.44%. The Tribunal emphasized that Section 144C(13) mandates the AO to complete the assessment in conformity with the DRP's directions without deviation. Hence, the Tribunal vacated the AO's order to the extent of the incorrect computation and directed the adoption of the operating profit as Rs. 11.83 crore as per the DRP's directions.

3. Inclusion of Comp-u-Learn Tech India Limited (CTIL) as a Comparable:
The TPO excluded CTIL, citing its involvement in the BPO sector and lack of segmental analysis. The DRP, however, found CTIL to be functionally comparable on a standalone basis and directed its inclusion subject to other filters applied by the TPO. The AO, in the final assessment order, excluded CTIL again, applying the Employees cost to sales filter, which was not originally applied by the TPO. The Tribunal clarified that the DRP's direction to apply "other filters" referred only to those initially considered by the TPO, and no new filters could be introduced at the stage of giving effect to the DRP's directions. The Tribunal found the AO's exclusion of CTIL based on a new filter to be impermissible and directed its inclusion in the list of comparables.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the order and remitted the matter to the AO for a fresh determination of the arm's length price of the international transaction of rendering software development and support services, considering the Tribunal's observations on the three companies discussed. The assessee is to be provided an opportunity of being heard. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

---