2015 (1) TMI 559 - AT - Income Tax

Transfer pricing adjustment - assessee pressed adoption of turnover filter and to exclude the companies which are having turnover of more than 200 crores - selection of comparable - Held that - Turnover is an important filter which has to be adopted for determination of the ALP. The FAR analysis would not alter the turnover of the company. In view of the turnover being higher than 200 crores in the case of the above companies we direct the AO to exclude these companies from the list of comparables. - Decided in favour of assessee. We direct that KALS Information Systems Ltd. a software product company be excluded from the comparables. The assessee before us is not developing any niche product, therefore direct that Tata Elxsi Ltd. be excluded from the comparables.Lucid Software Ltd. was not functionally similar to the assessee and the same has to be excluded from the comparables.here is no dispute that RPT filter in the case of Megasoft Ltd. was 17.08% that of Aztech Software Ltd. was 17.78% and that of Geometric Software Ltd. was 19.34%. Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal are consistently following 15% as cut off mark for applying the RPT filter. Accordingly we direct exclusion of Megasoft Ltd. Aztech Software Ltd. and Geometric Software Ltd. from the comparables. The AO is therefore directed to re-compute the ALP after excluding the companies directed by this Tribunal in this order. - Decided in favour of assessee by way of remand. Computation of deduction u/s 10A - Held that - Computation of deduction u/s 10A of the Act and to adjust both export turnover as well as total turnover by reducing 50% of data link charges of 33, 96, 939/- for computing deduction u/s 10A of the Act is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Elxsi Ltd. (2011 (8) TMI 782 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ). Thus we allow the said ground of appeal of the assessee and direct the AO to exclude data link charges both from the export turnover as well as the total turnover for computing deduction u/s 10A of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Adoption of the turnover filter for determining the Arm's Length Price (ALP).
2. Exclusion of certain companies based on functional dissimilarity.
3. Computation of deduction under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Adoption of the Turnover Filter for Determining the Arm's Length Price (ALP):
The assessee sought to adopt a turnover filter to exclude companies with a turnover exceeding Rs. 200 crores from the list of comparables, arguing that the assessee's turnover was only Rs. 80 crores. The Tribunal admitted this additional ground of appeal, referencing the case of Agile Software Enterprise Pvt. Ltd., which allowed such a point to be raised at any stage of the proceedings. The Tribunal directed the exclusion of companies like iGate Global Solutions Ltd., Infosys Technologies Ltd., Mindtree Ltd., Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd., and Flextronics Software Systems Ltd., as their turnovers exceeded Rs. 200 crores. The Tribunal emphasized that the turnover filter is a significant criterion consistently upheld in previous decisions, such as in the case of Genisys Integrating Systems (India) P. Ltd.

2. Exclusion of Certain Companies Based on Functional Dissimilarity:
The assessee argued for the exclusion of KALS Information Systems Ltd., Tata Elxsi Ltd., and Accel Transmatic Ltd. on the grounds of functional dissimilarity. The Tribunal agreed, citing the case of Agile Software Enterprise Pvt. Ltd., which established that these companies are product-oriented and not comparable to a software development services company. The Tribunal reiterated that functional dissimilarities make these companies unsuitable comparables and directed their exclusion.

Additionally, the Tribunal addressed the exclusion of companies like Lucid Software Ltd., Megasoft Ltd., Aztech Software Ltd., and Geometric Software Ltd. due to their involvement in product development or exceeding the Related Party Transaction (RPT) filter of 15%. The Tribunal referenced previous decisions, such as EMC Data, to support these exclusions. Mindtree Ltd. was also excluded based on the RPT filter, following the Tribunal's consistent application of the 15% cut-off mark.

3. Computation of Deduction under Section 10A:
The assessee sought to adjust both export turnover and total turnover by reducing 50% of data link charges for computing the deduction under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal found this issue in favor of the assessee, referencing the jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT vs. Tata Elxsi Ltd. The Tribunal directed the AO to exclude data link charges from both the export turnover and the total turnover for computing the deduction under Section 10A.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the exclusion of certain companies based on the turnover filter and functional dissimilarity, and adjusted the computation of deduction under Section 10A as per the jurisdictional High Court's decision. The Tribunal's decision emphasizes the importance of consistent application of filters and functional comparability in determining the ALP.