2018 (5) TMI 1941

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 27.01.2016 relating to assessment year 2011-12 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The assessee filed captioned two Cross Objections against the appeal of Revenue. 2. The appeal of Revenue along with two Cross Objections filed by the assessee were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take up the appeal of Revenue, wherein the following grounds of appeal have been raised:- 1. The DRP erred by directing to include R System International Limited as a comparable company without appreciating the fact that the company maintained its data for the period of 01/01/2010 to 31/12/2011, thereby company fail to pas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....PUN/2018. He further explained that second CO filed by the assessee was in substitution of earlier CO filed and it is not time barred. However, he pointed out that in view of the order of DRP and even if the two concerns i.e. R System International Ltd. and Coral Hub Ltd. are excluded, the margins shown by assessee are within +/- 5% range of mean margins of comparables finally selected, then the issues raised in the Cross Objections become academic in nature. In respect of CO No.01/PUN/2018, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee withdrew the same. 6. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue is decided against the assessee by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. PTC Software (I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see. 8. The Revenue however, is aggrieved by the directions of DRP, wherein it had directed inclusion of two concerns i.e. R System International Ltd. and Coral Hub Ltd. The Revenue has pointed out R System International Ltd. though functionally comparable, fail the filter adopted by the TPO i.e. current year data i.e. financial year 2010-11, wherein the data of said concern was maintained from 01.01.2010 to 31.12.2010. Similarly, in respect of concern Coral Hub Ltd., it was pointed out that even if the said concern was considered as functionally comparable, the data which was available was for the period 01.07.2010 to 30.06.2011. As per the Revenue, both the concerns fail the filter applied by the TPO and compared the results of the said ....