TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 1080
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n is filed against the order of Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Hyderabad dt. 18.04.2019 vide ITA No. 2010/Hyd/2017, seeking rectification on the following submissions. 1. In the appeal referred above, the appellant raised the following grounds: "1. The Learned (Ld) Dispute resolutions panel (DRP)/ Assessing Officer (AO) are erroneous in law and on the facts of the case. 2. The Ld. DRP/ Ld AO ought to have accepted the profit margin (DP/DC) of 6.27% adopted by the appellant as having complied with the arm's length principle. 3. The Ld DRP/AO are not justified in law in considering wrong comparables and consequently arriving at an arm's length margin of 24.11% after making Working capital adjustm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... TPO / DRP erred in computing/ confirming the margin of appellant company by treating Fringe Benefit Tax("FBT") as an operating expense, which resulted in reducing the margin of the Appellant company from 6.27% to 5.92%. 2. The Ld TPO/ORP are not justified in law in considering FBT as an operating expense in case of Appellant company as the Ld. TPO himself did not consider the FBT as an operating expense while computing the margins of com parables. " 2. The Hon'ble Income Appellate Tribunal disposed-off these grounds in its order dated 18.04.2019 in ITA No.2010/Hyd/2017. 3. The Hon'ble Income Appellate Tribunal in its order dated 18.04.2019 in ITA No. 2010/Hyd/2017, in para 9.2, mentioned that the case 3DPLM Software Solutions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re India ,P. Ltd. case (supra), we hold that this company ought to be omitted form the list of comoarao.es. The AO/TPO are accordingly directed." We notice that the decision of the ITAT, Bengaluru bench cannot be relied as it refers to AY 2007-08 and it is based on several other decisions. We notice that similar to assessee, Celestial Bio Labs also offers several services to its AEs and since we are determining with ALP based on TNMM, we consider the average margin of all the several activities carried on by the assessee. On a compartmentalizing two profit making companies with several activities, we can compare the end result, unless they are into product or highly diversified or some activities which will modify the profit making abilit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....trated that functional profile and other parameters are not changed in the year under consideration which is A.Y 2008-09, and accordingly excluded the same as a comparable in AY 2008-09. 7. Further, we would like to humbly submit that the Hon'ble ITAT observed in Para 9 of the order as follows: II As regards Celestial Biolabs Ltd., Id. AR submitted that this company cannot be a comparable to the assessee company as it is engaged in R&D activities and renders services to specific sectors. It provides contract research services and is also diversified into marketing and manufacturing activities. It is functionally different from the assessee company, thus, it has to be excluded from the final list of comparables. He relied on the foll....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....008-09, which clearly demonstrate the said company is functionally dissimilar. 9. It is therefore humbly submitted that there is a mistake apparent from the record in the order of the Hon'ble ITAT to this extent and hence it is prayed that the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal be pleased to rectify the above mistake by passing appropriate order." 2.1 The ld. AR of the assessee referring to the above factual background, requested the Bench to rectify the above mistake by passing appropriate order. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that the Hon'ble Bench has already considered this issue and applied its mind to come to a decision. As regards the mistake of mentioning of AY as 2007-08 instead of AY 2008-09, it may be ....