https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200673 In transfer pricing for software development services, Helios, FCS and e-Zest were excluded as comparables because Helios failed the turnover filter, FCS had mixed activities with no segmental data, and e-Zest was a product company. KALS was also excluded on the same functional mismatch, while Akshay was included. CG-VAK was retained because a single year loss, without abnormal circumstances, did not defeat comparability and segmental details were available. Working capital adjustment was remitted for fresh computation and allowance after verification, and the margin of Goldstone Technologies Ltd. was directed to be recomputed from the correct operating and segmental results. en-us Thu, 25 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:05:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200673 In transfer pricing for software development services, Helios, FCS and e-Zest were excluded as comparables because Helios failed the turnover filter, FCS had mixed activities with no segmental data, and e-Zest was a product company. KALS was also excluded on the same functional mismatch, while Akshay was included. CG-VAK was retained because a single year loss, without abnormal circumstances, did not defeat comparability and segmental details were available. Working capital adjustment was remitted for fresh computation and allowance after verification, and the margin of Goldstone Technologies Ltd. was directed to be recomputed from the correct operating and segmental results. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200673