9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not maintainable. - I.T.A.No.517/2016 - - - Dated:- 28-6-2018 - Dr. Vineet Kothari And Mrs. S. Sujatha, J.J. Mr. Sanmathi.E.I, Advocate- For the Appellant Mr. Mallaharao.K Mr.Sandeep.S.Karhail, Advocates- For the Respondent JUDGMENT 1. The Appellants - Revenue have filed this appeal raising purported substantial questions of law arising from the Order of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench: Bangalore, Annexure A dated 16/03/2016 in IT(TP)A.No.1336/Bang/2012 for AY 2008-09. 2. The appellants - Revenue have suggested six substantial questions of law which are quoted below for ready reference: - (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justified in excluding companies such as Avani Cincom Technologies, Celestial Biolabs, Kals Information System Ltd, Tata Thirdware Solution Ltd, Softsol India Ltd, E-Zest India Ltd as comparables by holding that the said companies are functionally different when all the required tests are satisfied in case of said companies? 3. In so far as the purported substantial questions of law raised by the appellants Revenue in this appeal are concerned, the learned ITAT in its Order dated 16/03/2016 has given the findings, the relevant portion of which is quoted below for ready reference:- 6.1 The first objection of the assessee is no selection of certain comparable companies and rejection of certain comparables selected by the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LGS Global Ltd. 27.52% 15 Mindtree Ltd. 16.41% 16 Persistent Systems Ltd. 20.31% 17 Quintegra Solutions Ltd. 21.74% 18 R.S. Software (India)Ltd. 7.41% 19 R. Systems International (Seg) 15.30% 20 Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd.(Seg) 7.58% Arithmetic Mean 23.65% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7.2 The above companies were considered by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Yodlee Infotech Pvt.Ltd. in IT(TP)A No.1538/Bang/ 2012 dated 30.8.2013 wherein vide para 25 and 26, the Bench directed as under:- 7.3 Even though the assessee contended that the reimbursement costs are included in the working, the actual working of TPO is not verifiable. Therefore, following the above order of Coordinate Bench, we restore the issue to the file of TPO to examine the computation again by excluding the reimbursement cost since it do not have any profit margin and also to consider whether the companies fail the RPT filter or not. Assessee should be given due opportunity and its working should be considered after due examination. The groun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been rightly picked up or not, Filters for arriving at the correct list of comparables have been rightly applied or not, do not in our considered opinion, give rise to any substantial question of law. 56. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the present appeals filed by the Revenue do not give rise to any substantial question of law and the suggested substantial questions of law do not meet the requirements of Section 260-A of the Act and thus the appeals filed by the Revenue are found to be devoid of merit and the same are liable to be dismissed. 57. We make it clear that the same yardsticks and parameters will have to be applied, even if such appeals are filed by the Assessees, because, there may be cases where the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
