TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (4) TMI 356
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal to raise the following questions in the cross objections which are pure questions of law and in accordance with the ratio of the apex court in National Thermal Power Corporation 229 ITR Page 383 has raised the same for adjudication for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. a. The order of the assessment is bad in law as the mandatory conditions to invoke the jurisdiction u/s92CA of the Act did not exist, or having not been complied with and consequently the orders of the Assessing Officer is bad in law for want of requisite jurisdiction. b. The Assessing Officer erred in not providing the copy of the approval granted by the Commissioner which is in violation of the settled principles of natural justice and thus the order of assessment needs to be set aside. c. The authorities failed to appreciate that as the Assessing Officer has to pass an order in conformity with the order of the transfer pricing officer, it is incumbent on them to give us an opportunity of being heard before referring the matter to the TPO and hence reference to TPO without hearing us before the reference is in violation of the principles of natural justice and on this count also the or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....panies engaged in performing Knowledge Process Outsourcing ('KPO') functions otherwise not comparable, as comparable to the assessee engaged in providing medical transcription services which are in the nature of back-end IT enabled services; 13. Accepting certain companies with abnormally high margins and certain companies with high turnover otherwise not comparable to the assessee; 14. Not granting comparability adjustment on account of difference in risk assumed by the assessee vis a vis the comparable companies and in ignoring the qualification of above adjustments for such difference; 15. Accepting the incorrect computation of the operating margins of some of the comparable companies by the TPO; and 16. Rejecting the plea that the assessee is a software technology park of India ("STPI") unit which is entitled to tax holiday and consequently there is no motivation for shifting profits through transfer pricing mechanism. 17. The respondent craves leave to add, alter, delete, modify any of the grounds which are urged above. 18. For the above and such other grounds as may be urged at the time of hearing the respondent prays your Honour to consider the facts and circumst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efit of 5 % standard deduction while determining the ALP of the international transactions. It is further submitted that the aforesaid additional grounds of appeal is purely legal in nature and does not involve any fresh investigation into facts, and the Applicant by way of this application, craves leave of this Hon'ble Bench to raise the aforesaid additional grounds. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (S.C)and in the decision in the case of Jute Corporation of India Vs. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (S.C). It was stated that the discretion vest in the I.T.A.T under Rule 11 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, it is prayed that the aforesaid additional ground of appeal may kindly be admitted and adjudicated on merits. The assessee emphasises that the request should be acceded to. 5. The Ld. AR further submitted that he is not pressing Ground No. 1, 2(b), 2(c), 3 to 15, 17 & 18 of assessee's cross-objection and contesting only Ground No. 2(a) read with 16. Hence, Ground No. 1, 2(b), 2(c), 3 to 15, 17 & 18 are dismissed. 6. The Ld. DR submitted that after merger and de-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ogies Ltd. which had been confirmed by Hyderabad ITAT in the case of Capital IQ Information Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly rejected Mold Tek Technologies Ltd as a comparable. 10. Before us, the Ld. AR also relied upon the judgment in case of Maersk Global Centre India Pvt. Ltd Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax decided by Special Bench of ITAT Mumbai reported at (2014) 147 ITD 83 wherein the same company which was excluded by the CIT(A) in the present case, has been excluded by the Tribunal on the following reasoning: "Para 81. In so far as the case of Mold-Tek Technologies Ltd. is concerned, it is observed from the annual report of the said company for the Financial Year 2007-08 placed at page 139 to 151 of the paper book that the said company was pioneer in structural engineering KPO services and its entire business comprised of providing only structural engineering services to various clients. Further information of Mold-Tek Technologies Ltd. available on their Website is furnished in the form of printout at page 158 to 165 of the paper book and a perusal of the same shows that is leading provider of engineering and design services with specialization i....