TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 508
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stated to be primarily engaged in providing pre-sale and post-sale support services to its AEs and it provides marketing assistance and tertiary support to the sales team of the AEs by way of business consultants, solutions specialists and pre-sales engineers, post sales support services comprise of implementation assistance, training, consulting and maintenance of solutions to the end customers of the AEs in India and is also stated to be rendering on - call support services to the customers of Verint U.K. in U.S. and U.K. region. Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 on 28.11.2011 declaring total income at Rs. 3,56,11,147/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s Concept Communication Ltd selected by the TPO for calculating the Arm Length Price of International Transactions entered into by the assessee with its associates. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the comparable transactions of M/s Crystal Hues Ltd selected by the TPO for calculating the Arm Length Price of International Transactions entered into by the assessee with its associates. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the comparable transactions of M/s Cameo Corporate Services Ltd. selected by the TPO for calculating the Arm Length Price of International Transactions entered into by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Length Price of International Transactions entered into by the assessee with its associates. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the comparable transactions of M/s C D S SL Ventures Ltd selected by the TPO for calculating the Arm Length Price of International Transactions entered into by the assessee with its associates. 10. The appellant craves, leave or reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." 4. Before us, at the outset, Ld. AR submitted that if Ground No.4 & 9 raised in the Revenue's appeal are decided in assessee's favour by upholding the order of C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the assessee was engaged in providing administrative/facilitation assistance, providing product support and training to dealers and customers; assistance in relation to marketing/new business developments; communicating new business opportunity to AE; and providing assistance in negotiating the price of the products/terms of the contract with the customers as against the activity of M/s. Info Edge (India) Ltd. which was primarily in the business of internet based services where anybody could have access their websites on payment. CIT(A) after comparing the activities of the assessee of M/s. Info Edge (India) Ltd. has given a finding that the services rendered by M/s. Info Edge (India) Ltd. cannot be considered to be a comparable with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o their websites as against the activities of assessee which is stated to be engaged in providing the administrative/facilitation assistance, providing product support and training to dealers and customers; assistance in relation to marketing/new business developments; communicating new business opportunity to AE; and providing assistance in negotiating the price of the products/terms of the contract with the customers. CIT(A) after considering the nature of activities had thus given a finding that nature of activities carried between the assessee and M/s. Info Edge (India) Ltd. are completely different services and the two cannot be considered to be a comparables and he therefore directed its exclusion. Before us, no fallacy in the finding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....usion from being a comparable company. 13. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 14. Before us, Learned DR pointed to the findings of TPO and submitted that CIT(A) has erred in directing its exclusion from the list of comparable companies. 15. Learned AR on the other hand reiterated the submissions of lower authorities and supported the order of CIT(A). 16. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the exclusion of CDSL Ventures as a comparable companies. CIT(A) after considering the business profile and the details, has given a finding that it belongs to ITES segment, more than 80% of its income is by way ....