9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in ITA No. 4187/Del/2012 and ITA No. 2766/Del/2011 relating to the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06, respectively. 2. The issue sought to be raised in the present appeals pertains to the adjustment made by the Transfer Pricing Officer and the consequent additions made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment orders pertaining to both the assessment years. The respondent / assessee entered into a service agreement with its associated enterprise in Singapore namely Verizon Communications Singapore Pvt Ltd. Since it was an associated enterprise, the Assessing Officer referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer for determining the arms length price. The Transfer Pricing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ars, being aggrieved by the decision of the CIT (Appeals) in respect of question No.4. 5. The Tribunal examined the issue of whether the four comparables selected by the Transfer Pricing Officer were functionally comparable to the services rendered by the respondent / assessee to its associated enterprise. In this context, the Tribunal examined each of the four entities namely EIL, RITES Ltd, TCE Consulting Engineers Ltd and Water & Power Consultancy Services Ltd and found that these four entities were not functionally comparable in respect of the services rendered by the respondent/assessee to its associated enterprise in Singapore. It has been established on facts that while the services rendered by the respondent / assessee were in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24. On these facts we find no infirmity in the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) admitting a ground by the assessee, wherein it argued that the comparables selected by it in the T.P. report are erroneous." 6. It would be relevant to point out that in view of the above conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal, the respondent / assessee did not press the cross objections and the same were dismissed as nonpressed. 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and examined the matter in detail and find that the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal on facts clearly demonstrates that the services rendered by the respondent / assessee to its associated enterprise are in the nature of marketing services which are entirely different to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
