9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 469X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .1809/Del/2012, Cross Objection No.89/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 27-9-2013 - Shri G. D. Agrawal And Shri Rajpal Yadav,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri M. B. Reddy, CIT-DR. For the Respondent : Shri Pawan Kumar, Shri Rohit Tiwari Shri Shobhit Narula, ARs. ORDER Per G. D. Agrawal, VP :- ITA No.1809/Del/2012 :- This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-XX, New Delhi dated 19th December, 2011 for the AY 2005-06. 2. The only ground raised by the Revenue reads as under:- The ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs.1,27,87,016/- on account of transfer pricing adjustment. 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee has disclosed the operating profit at 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arious arguments, as stated earlier, were taken before the DRP which inter-alia included rejection of comparable cases; application of arbitrary filter of wage to sales ratio; ignoring that the assessee is a limited risk company; inclusion of Infosys Technologies Ltd.; and inclusion of Satyam Computers Services Ltd. in spite of the fact that its data is not reliable as publicly known. On the basis of these arguments, the DRP excluded the case of Satyam Computers Services Ltd., thereby reducing the arm s length margin to 25.6%. It is argued that the case of the assessee is not comparable with Infosys Technologies Ltd., the reason being that the latter is giant in the area of development of software and it assumes all risks, leading to higher ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee had furnished details of workables in respect of 23 companies and the mean of the comparables worked out to 10%, as against the margin of 17% shown by the assessee. Details of these companies are mentioned in para 5 of the impugned order. 9. In view of the aforesaid position, we do not think that any substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appeal is dismissed. 6. From the above, it is evident that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has also approved the finding of the ITAT that Infosys Technologies Ltd. as well as Satyam Computer Services Ltd. cannot be taken as comparables to the assessee company. The CIT(A) has allowed the relief only by excluding these two comparables from the list of comparables taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
