TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 300
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....II Mumbai, date of direction dt. 30.12.2013 and the date of assessment order is 29.01.2014. 2. The assessee is an Indian company incorporated on 12.5.1992 and is a 99.99% owned subsidiary of Willis Europe BV, a company incorporated in Netherlands. The assessee is providing Information Technology Enabled Services (ITES) to its various group companies. The ITES services provided by the assessee includes processing of insurance claims, premiums and treaties, accounting for insurance underwriters and clients, insurance accounting support services and data processing. 3. The return for the year was filed declaring an income of Rs. 1,73,56,555/- under normal provisions of the Act alongwith an Accountant's report in Form No. 3CEB reporting t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... services As per FAR analysis, the assessee is categorized as a "risk mitigated captive service provider" and selected as the tested party. Transactional Net margin Method (TNMM) was considered as the most appropriate method to determine the ALP. The assessee adopted the operating profit/operating cost as the Profit Level Indicator. The assessee worked out the PLI at 17.65%. The arithmetic mean PLI of the comparable companies out of set of 8 comparable companies was worked out to 14.34%. Since the PLI shown by the assessee was higher than the PLI of comparable companies, the international transactions were concluded to be at arm's length. ii) Purchase of office chairs CUP was considered as the most appropriate method to determine t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent to account for differences in the risk profile of the assessee vis-à-vis the comparable companies. The TPO applied the PLI differential which was 35.81% - 13.86% = 21.95% and accordingly an adjustment of Rs. 10,36,24,658/- was made. 3.3. In so far as purchase of office chairs is concerned, the TPO conducted a survey to determine the price of the chairs and arrived at a cost of Rs. 500/- per chair and made an upward adjustment of Rs. 4,23,904/-. 4. The assessee carried the matter before the Dispute Resolution Panel raising objections. 5. After considering the facts and the submissions and the objections of the assessee, the DRP rejected 4 out of 12 additional comparable introduced by the TPO which are Accentia Technologie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vidences brought on record before us in the light of the judicial decisions relied upon by the assessee, let us consider the comparables rejected by the DRP which are disputed in Revenue's appeal: 1. Genpact India ltd. The assessee has rejected this comparable which has been accepted by the DRP. The TPO has included this comparable on the ground that the company is engaged in similar activity. The reasons submitted by the assessee for rejection of this company is that the company provides a host of high end BPO services which included finance and accounting, insurance, data modelling and analytic support whereas the assessee is providing low end support services following predefined procedure and set standards which require less skill....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kill IT services which are not comparable to the routine I.T. Enabled services. The Tribunal Hyderabad Bench in the case of M/s. Market Tools Research Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 1811/Hyd/12 has held that this company is providing services which are in the nature of KPO. Further, the company is engaged in providing Niche services as well as developed its own brand 'Exdion' to target the insurance industry in US. The Tribunal followed the findings of the Bangalore Bench in the case of M/s. Symphony Marketing Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1316/Bang/2012 while rejecting the issue of this company in the final set of comparables. Respectfully following the findings of the co ordinate bench, we uphold the directions of the DRP for the rejection of....