2011 (9) TMI 1246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r.w.s 144C(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer in disallowing the claim of the assessee for full deduction u/s 10A for all of its profit and gains from the software business of the STPI unit at Bangalore by adopting as the denominator, the total turnover of the business without deducting the expenditure on delivery of software outside India and expenses incurred in foreign currency which has been reduced from the nominator, the export turnover. The assessee is also aggrieved by the adjustment made to the arms length price of the transaction between the assessee and its associated enterprises which has been confirmed by the DRP. 3. The brief facts of the cas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing the claim of deduction u/s 10A of the Act and forwarded the same to the DRP and also to the assessee. The assessee filed its objections before the DRP, which confirmed the draft order of the AO. Against this order of the AO, confirmed by the DRP, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made by the assessee before the authorities below. Further, the Assessing Officer had also reduced the expenses in foreign currency for delivery of software and telecommunication charges from export turnover but not from the total turn over for computing the deduction u/s 10A of the Act. Against this disallowance u/s 10A also, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. At the time of heari....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s not made available to the assessee. As regards the determination of the ALP, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that TPO has not taken into consideration the difference in the risks assumed by the assessee vis-à-vis comparable companies because the assessee operates in a risk free environment as compared to the comparable companies. As regards comparables considered by the Assessing Officer, he submitted that one of the comparables i.e Mega soft has been wrongly considered though it is a software product and services company and no segmental break up of its revenues was available. He further submitted that the profits of the assessee company are tax free in India and, therefore, there is no attempt to transfer its profi....