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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2020 (12) TMI 1191 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Appeal partially allowed, exclusions & inclusions directed, certain issues remitted for fresh consideration. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the exclusion of Persistent Systems Limited and Sasken Communication Technologies Limited from the list ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Appeal partially allowed, exclusions & inclusions directed, certain issues remitted for fresh consideration.

                            The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the exclusion of Persistent Systems Limited and Sasken Communication Technologies Limited from the list of comparables and inclusion of Evoke Technologies Pvt. Ltd. The issues concerning E-Zest Solutions Limited and LGS Global Limited were remitted for fresh consideration. Other grounds raised were not adjudicated as the assessee did not press them during the hearing.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Rejection of Transfer Pricing (TP) documentation.
                            2. Comparability analysis and selection of comparable companies.
                            3. Inclusion and exclusion of specific companies for comparability.
                            4. Application of multiple year/prior year data.
                            5. Treatment of foreign exchange fluctuations.
                            6. Adjustment towards the difference in risk profile.
                            7. Charging of interest under section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Rejection of Transfer Pricing (TP) documentation:
                            The assessee challenged the rejection of its TP documentation by the TPO and the subsequent adjustment to the transfer price for its software development services. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not press this ground during the hearing, thus it was not adjudicated.

                            2. Comparability analysis and selection of comparable companies:
                            The Tribunal examined the rejection of the comparability analysis performed by the assessee and the acceptance of the analysis by the TPO. The assessee did not press this ground either, leading to no adjudication on this issue.

                            3. Inclusion and exclusion of specific companies for comparability:
                            Persistent Systems Limited: The Tribunal found that this company, engaged in diversified activities with no segmental breakup, was not comparable. The Tribunal directed the TPO/Assessing Officer to exclude Persistent Systems Limited from the list of comparables, following the judicial precedence set in the case of LG Software India Pvt. Ltd.

                            Sasken Communication Technologies Limited: The Tribunal noted that this company was engaged in media products and R&D activities with no segmental information, making it functionally dissimilar to the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the TPO/Assessing Officer to exclude this company from the list of comparables.

                            E-Zest Solutions Limited: The assessee argued for the exclusion of this company, claiming it was engaged in Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) and not software development. The Tribunal remitted the issue to the Assessing Officer/TPO for examination of functional dissimilarities.

                            LGS Global Limited: The Tribunal referred to a previous decision where it was held that the inclusion/exclusion of this company should be determined after verifying the employee cost and other relevant facts. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer/TPO for fresh consideration.

                            Evoke Technologies Pvt. Ltd.: The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that this company should not have been excluded by the DRP suo moto, especially when both the assessee and the revenue sought its inclusion. The Tribunal directed the TPO/Assessing Officer to include Evoke Technologies Pvt. Ltd. in the list of comparables.

                            4. Application of multiple year/prior year data:
                            The assessee did not press this ground during the hearing, and thus it was not adjudicated.

                            5. Treatment of foreign exchange fluctuations:
                            The assessee did not press this ground during the hearing, and thus it was not adjudicated.

                            6. Adjustment towards the difference in risk profile:
                            The assessee did not press this ground during the hearing, and thus it was not adjudicated.

                            7. Charging of interest under section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
                            The assessee did not press this ground during the hearing, and thus it was not adjudicated.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing the TPO/Assessing Officer to exclude Persistent Systems Limited and Sasken Communication Technologies Limited from the list of comparables, and to include Evoke Technologies Pvt. Ltd. The issues regarding E-Zest Solutions Limited and LGS Global Limited were remitted back to the TPO/Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. No other grounds were argued before the Tribunal.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found