2018 (7) TMI 483

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Revenue have suggested the following substantial questions of law for our consideration, which are quoted below for ready reference: - "1. WHETHER, in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is right in holding that Kals Information Systems Ltd, cannot be taken as comparable, being functionally different when it satisfies all the qualitative and quantitative filters applied by the TPO? 2. WHETHER, the ITAT is right in superimposing the decision of other Benches of ITAT in the present case to reject the comparables when selection of comparables in the case of transfer pricing depends on assessee-specific FAR analysis? 3. In so far as the substantial questions of law raised by the appellants - Revenue are concerned, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent commentary. The real data are to be examined to arrive at a conclusion of nature of functional profile and source of revenue of the comparable company. We further note that in the case of M/s 3DPLM Software Solutions Ltd (supra) the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal found that this company is a functional comparable to the software development services. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the real facts and date are required to be properly examined at the end of the AO/TPO. Accordingly, we set aside the issue to the file of AO/TPO on the issue of functional comparability of Bodhtree Consulting Ltd with the assessee company for proper examination of the facts and then to decide the is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Filters for arriving at the correct list of comparables have been rightly applied or not, do not in our considered opinion, give rise to any substantial question of law. 56. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the present appeals filed by the Revenue do not give rise to any substantial question of law and the suggested substantial questions of law do not meet the requirements of Section 260-A of the Act and thus the appeals filed by the Revenue are found to be devoid of merit and the same are liable to be dismissed. 57. We make it clear that the same yardsticks and parameters will have to be applied, even if such appeals are filed by the Assessees, because, there may be cases where the Tribunal giving its own....