TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 647
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ering the designated BPO / collections services from its facility / infrastructure in India. As for AY 2019-20, the assessee filed its return of income (ROI') declaring an income of INR 21,88,55,720 on November 30, 2019. According to the Assessing Officer, on the basis of survey conducted on 25.02.2019, this case was taken for compulsory scrutiny as documents were impounded. Subsequently, the Assessee received a notice dated September 28, 2020 under Section 143(2) of the Act requesting for certain information / documents, which were furnished from time to time during the course of the assessment proceedings. The Assessee's case was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer ("TPO") for the relevant assessment by the Assessing Officer ("AO"). Thereafter, the Assessee received show cause notice dated September 29, 2021 from the TPO under section 92CA of the Act (refer page 162-163/PB). During the course of proceedings, the Assessee submitted relevant information/documents as called upon by the TPO from time-to-time. 3. The TPO after analyzing the transactions and making further enquiries, passed the order dated January 21, 2022, under section 92CA(3) of the Act, wherein TPO ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al and Ground no. 4 and 5 are not pressed. 4.1 In regard to ground Nos. 2 and 3, we find same arises out of disallowing the support services cost amounting to INR 9,58,81,838. The ld. AR submitted that grounds are supported by the Assessee's own cases, Genpact Services LLC vs ACIT: [2024] 101 taxmann.com 785 /TA Na 1992/Del/2022 for AY 2017-18 and Gennact Services LLC vs ACIT: [2024] TS-359-ITAT-2024DEL-TP /ITA No. 1834/Del/2022 for AY 2018- 19, as decided by this Co-ordinate Bench, wherein, the issues in question in the present appeal are identical to those of the preceding assessment years (AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19). 4.2. This fact has also been noted by the Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel in its directions dated 09.12.2022 in para no.4.2.3.1, which is reproduced as under:- "4.2.3.1 In view of above, the Panel takes a note that this is a legacy issue which has been coming up before the Panel since AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19. The factual matrix continues to be almost the same for AY 2019-20 also. The Panel does not find any ground or reasons to deviate from its earlier opinion in this regard. Accordingly, the assessing officer's action in this regard, is upheld and the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....note here that these costs have not been allocated on monthly basis, as should have been done, and as was required vide the terms of the Cost Sharing Agreement but was done as a once in a year (annual) exercise using average annual data. This method adds to the inaccuracy and blurs real-time figures. This also amounts to inaccurate methodology of cost allocation." 4.4. The relevant extract of the order of the Tribunal in Para No.11 to 15, as relied by the assessee in AY 2017-18(supra) is reproduced below: 11. The fact of services being rendered is not disputed by the revenue right from the time of survey. In fact, both the ld. AO and Id. DRP merely rely on the findings given in AY 2015-16. In our considered opinion, the cost allocation Key on 'headcount basis' has been duly examined and accepted by the ld. TPO to be at ALP in the transfer pricing proceedings u/s 92CA(3) of the Act. The same cannot be subjected to retest by the ld. AO in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case, under the garb of examining the same in the context of allowability of deduction u/s 37 of the Act as argued by the Id. DR before us. No doubt, the scope of Id. TPO is only to ensu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... followed AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 for making the adjustment. Therefore, respectfully following the order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for AY 2017-18 (supra) the ground Nos. 2 and 3 raised by the assessee are allowed and the disallowances of expenses amounting to Rs. 9,58,81,838/- stands deleted. 6. Additional Ground No. 1: This ground filed by the assessee vide letter dated 28.08.2023 arises out of claim of assessee that during the FY 2009-10 (relevant to AY 2010-11), the Assessee acquired a business of third-party debt collection services as well as part of the analytics business from Genpact India Pvt. Ltd (the seller entity') for a total sum of INR 62,12,70,648 vide agreement to sell entered into between the Assessee and Genpact India. Out of the total purchase consideration of INR 62,12,70,648, an aggregate sum of INR 22,16,00,276 (paid towards acquisition of customer contracts as well as the assembled workforce) was claimed as revenue expenditure by the Assessee in its return of income ('ROI"), filed for AY 2010-11. Subsequently, the ROI of AY 2010-11 was selected for scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. The AO, vide assessment order, dated....