TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 1132
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5(1)(1), Bangalore under section 143(3) read with 144C(3) of the Act on following grounds of appeal: IT(TP)A No.367/Bang/2016 1. The direction of the Dispute Resolution Panel are opposed to the law and not on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.DRP erred in directing the Assessing officer to reduce the expenditure incurred in foreign currency, both from the Export Turnover as well as total Turnover for the purpose of computation of deduction u/s 10 of the IT act without appreciating the fact that the statute allows exclusion of such expenditure only from ETO by way of specific definition of export turnover as envisaged by sub-clause(4) of explanation 2 be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned Transfer Pricing Officer/Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel have grossly erred by arbitrarily rejecting the companies selected /accepted by the Appellant as comparables on unjustifiable grounds. 3. The learned Transfer Pricing Officer has grossly erred by disregarding the functional profile of the Appellant and comparing it with a company having different functional profile and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel has erred in confirming the same. 4. The Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel has grossly erred in applying 'onsite revenue filter'. 5. The Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel has grossly erred by rejecting comparables having expenditure in foreign currency of less than 75% to total re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....associated enterprises exceeding Rs.15 crores, and therefore, reference was made to the Transfer Pricing officer under section 92C of the Act. 4. On receipt of reference, the Ld. TPO called upon assessee to file the economic details of international transaction with its associated enterprises. 5. The Ld. TPO from the details filed, observed that, assessee is a wholly owned subsidiary of Continuous Computing Corporation, USA, and it is established in India mainly to assist and support the business of its AE through development and support of computer software to its holding company. It was observed that, assessee had following international transactions during the year under consideration with its AE: International Transactions A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... n R S Software (India) Ltd. 16.37% 12 Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd 24.13% 13 Tata Elxsi Ltd (seg) 20.91% AVERAGE MARGIN 24.82% 9. The Ld.TPO thus proposed an adjustment of Rs.2,54,87,730/-being shortfall. 10. On receipt of the Transfer Pricing Order, the Ld.AO passed draft assessment order. In the draft assessment order the Ld.AO disallowed a sum of Rs.24,58,203/- being deduction claimed under section 10A of the Act. The Ld.AO made the disallowance on the ground that, the appeal against decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of Tata Elxsi, reported in (2011) 247 CTR 334, has been filed by revenue before Hon'ble Supreme Court which was pending during relevant period. 11.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd. 18. It was further submitted by the Ld.AR that in respect of Evoke Technologies and CG-Vak Software and Exports Ltd., assessee had not raised any objection against the 2 companies before DRP. However, the DRP rejected these 2 companies on its own. It has been submitted that these comparables were acceptable to both assessee as well as the Ld.TPO, and therefore needs to be restored to the final set of comparables. 19. As regards R.S.Software Ltd., Ld.AR submitted that the DRP excluded this comparable suo moto, by applying on-site revenue filter. It was submitted that, this filter was not applied by the Ld.TPO for selecting the final set of comparables. Both revenue as well as assessee urged that these comparables may be restored b....