TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1526
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact seeking exact comparability under TNNM? b) The learned CIT(A) has erred in law in ignoring the parameters of analysis prescribed under Rule JOB, which are exhaustive and if so, whether it is legally permissible to bypass the same partially or by implication? c) The learned CIT(A) has erred by directing to exclude certain comparables on application of turnover filter ignoring the jurisdictional ITAT's decision in this case of M/s Societe General Global Solution Centre (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT, Circle-12(3), Bangalore vide IT(TP) A No. 118 (Bang)201? d) The learned CIT(A) has erred in fact and in law in not acknowledging that there is no direct relationship between brand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d its return of income for Assessment Year 2004-05 on 22.11.2004 declaring a total loss of Rs. 40,84,968. The case was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act and the case was taken up for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. A reference u/s. 92CA(1) of the Act was made by the Ld.AO to the Ld.TPO in respect of the following international transactions entered into by the assessee with it's A.Es. Nature of International Transactions Value Rs. Call Centre Services 66,00,46,029 Import of Capital Equipment 45,43,167 Reimbursement of Expenses 1,78,60,545 Cross Charge of Expenses 33,56,693 Total 68,58,06,434 2.2 The Ld.TPO passed order u/s. 92C r.w.s. 92CA(1) of the Act dt. 15.12.2006 making an adjust....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decided vide separate orders passed by this Tribunal. In assessee's appeal, the Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dated 12.07.2017 remanded the matter back to the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on transfer pricing issue. This Tribunal held that, the first appellate authority was duty bound to examine the FAR of the comparables and was also to provide the reasoning with respect to the inclusion of the comparables selected by the TPO. In the revenue's appeal on corporate ground, this Tribunal passed a consolidated order for A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 dismissing the appeals. Accordingly the order of Ld.CIT(A) was upheld. 2.8 The second round of litigation: The only issue that was remanded by this Tribunal before CIT(A) was in respect of transf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that where rates of depreciation were different in case of assessee and comparable companies, Rule 10B(1) permits an adjustment in the hands of the tested party also and depreciation adjustment has to be allowed." Respectfully following the above view, we do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly grounds g-h raised by revenue stands dismissed. 6. Grounds a to d: Aggrieved by the view taken by Ld.CIT(A) in respect of excluding comparables by applying turnover filter excluding certain comparables from the final list. 7. We note that the Ld.CIT(A) excluded following comparables for following reasons: S. No. Comparable Reason for exclusion by Ld.CIT(A) 1. Saffron Global Ltd. The L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een observed in case of Global e-Business Operations Pvt. Ltd. reported in 86 taxmann.com 197 (Bangalore) The Ld.DR could not controvert any of the above findings of the Ld.CIT(A) for exclusion of above comparables. We therefore not inclined to interfere with the view taken by Ld.CIT(A) and the same is upheld. Accordingly grounds a to d raised by revenue stands dismissed. 8. Grounds e to f raised by revenue in respect of risk adjustment directed to be granted by the Ld.CIT(A). 8.1 We note that there is a detailed observation by the Ld.CIT(A) for granting risk adjustment to assessee. It is also noted that, no details were furnished by assessee in respect of risk, assumed by the comparable companies with that of the assessee that ....