2021 (1) TMI 921

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the Assessment year 2006-07. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 24.08.2016 on the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether on the facts ad in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in excluding M/s Vishal Information Technologies Ltd as comparable company of ITES segment in holding that M/s VITL outsources majority of its work ignoring the fact that outsourcing entails higher cost resulting in lower operating profit. (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in excluding M/s Nucleus Netsoft & GIS (India) ltd., is not a comparable brushing aside the fact that it was taken as a comparable by the assessee on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e tribunal in 'HSBC ELECTRONIC DATEA PROCESSING INDIA LTD. VS. ACIT', (2013) 38 TAXMANN.COM 141 (HYDERABAD - TRIB) held that profile of HSBC supra is similar to assessee and therefore, Vishal Information Technologies Ltd. And Nucles Netsoft and GIS India Ltd. are required to be excluded. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the tribunal without appreciating the fact that the assessee in its transfer pricing study before the Transfer Pricing Officer had chosen certain comparables and had later on contended before the tribunal that the same cannot be taken as comparables. Therefore, the assessee could not have been permitted to take contradictory stand an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....767/2017 DATED 25.09.2017. 5. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. It is trite law that tribunal is a final fact finding authority and has to consider the material brought before it. In the instant case, the relevant extract of the order passed by the tribunal, reads as under: 14. We have considered the rival submission sand are of the view that in light of the aforesaid decision of ITAT rendered in case of a company, which is engaged in rendering ITES services similar to that of the assessee, the aforesaid companies have to be excluded as functionally not comparable with that of the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The AO is directed to compute the ari....