TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 1392
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come at Rs. 2,74,56,554 as against the returned income of Rs. 1,88,70,768 as computed by the Appellant: 2. The learned AO/ TPO and the learned DRP have erred, in law and in facts, by not accepting the economic analysis undertaken by the Appellant in accordance with the provisions of the Act read with the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ("Rules"), conducting a fresh economic analysis for the determination of the ALP in connection with the impugned international transaction, and holding that the Appellant's international transaction is not at arm's length; 3. The learned AO/ TPO have erred, in law and in facts, by not considering Impresario Event Management India Private Limited as a comparable company, disregarding the directions issued by the DRP; 4. The learned AO/ TPO and the learned DRP have erred, in law and in facts, by determining the arm's length margin/ price using data pertaining only to FY 2010-11 which was not available for almost of the comparable companies to the Appellant at the time of complying with the transfer pricing documentation requirement; 5. The learned AO/ TPO and the learned DRP have erred, in law and in facts, by acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mployees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, as operating in nature, and in considering liabilities no longer required written back of INR 6,03,728 as non-operating in nature while computing the operating margin on operating cost of Lloyds India at 7.21%." 3. The above grounds given rise to the following issues:- a) TP adjustment made by the A.O. b) Short credit of advance tax. Other grounds are either general in nature or consequential. 4. The assessee was incorporated in October, 2003. It primarily, oversees its principal LTSBs Outsourcing Contracts in India and provided following support services to its A.E. * Staff Welfare support * Risk and compliance management * Incident and crisis management coordination * Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) * Industry representation * Provide support to business units in industry regulation and trends * Provide support in seeking other opportunities * Supplier Management Support * Other services. Hence the assessee is engaged in providing Business support services. The TPO selected companies engaged in "market....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion of the above set of two companies. II.2 We heard Ld. D.R. and perused the record. We notice that the assessee has not raised any specific ground with regard to Asian Business Execution & Conferences Ltd. Accordingly, we decline to entertain the contentions with regard to the above said company. The Ld A.R submitted that M/s ICC International Agencies Ltd has been held to be not good comparable company for an assessee providing market support services, by the coordinate bench in the case of ALCON Laboratories India Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The relevant observations made by the Tribunal in respect of this company are extracted below: "21. The relevant ground of Revenue is Ground No.2 which is reproduced below:- "2. The DRP erred in directing to exclude M/s. ICC International Agencies Ltd., holding it to be functionally dissimilar on the ground of non-availability of information regarding nature of services, when the primary activity of the comparable involves processing orders including for its principal concern also the DRP erred in imposing conditions beyond the scope of law and business reality by rejecting all close comparables on one or the other ground....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 of the paper book. Since the assessee is not engaged in trading activity, in our considered opinion, this company cannot be considered as good comparable in the present case and hence we direct the AO/TPO to exclude his company from the list of final comparable." 23. Following the said decision, we direct exclusion of the aforesaid company ICC International Agencies Ltd., from the list of comparable companies. The ld. DR submitted that ICC International Agencies Ltd., was accepted by assessee himself as comparable before the TPO. We find that before the DRP in the objections, the assessee has objected to inclusion of ICC International Agencies Ltd., as comparable company on several counts at page 05 of the written submission filed before the DRP on 04.12.2015. The Special Bench of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of DCIT v. Quark Systems (P) Ltd. ([2010] 38 SOT 307 (CHD.) (SB) has held that an assessee cannot be precluded from seeking exclusion of a company selected by it in its TP study, when the company is otherwise not comparable to the assessee. We therefore reject that argument of the learned DR in this regard." Following the above said decision of coor....