9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be excluded from the final list of comparables. Accordingly, we uphold the order of CIT(A) and dismiss the ground of appeal No.1 raised by the Revenue. Exclusion of Infosys Technologies Ltd. and L T Infotech being not comparable for not fulfilling the filter of turnover and also the brand - As relying on TIBCO SOFTWARE INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE AND VICE-VERSA [ 2017 (1) TMI 1574 - ITAT PUNE] we uphold the order of CIT(A) in excluding Infosys Technologies Ltd. and L T Infotech Ltd. from the final list of comparables, wherein the said concerns were product companies and functionally not comparable. Further, the said concerns are not comparable because of high turnover, as against the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvice of notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application was moved for adjournment. Since the issue is covered by the orders of Tribunal, we proceed to decide the present appeal after hearing the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue. 4. In this appeal of Revenue, the first issue raised by the Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude FCS Software Ltd. as comparable contrary to the view taken by the Delhi Bench of Tribunal in Navisite India (P) Ltd. (TS 193 ITAT 2013), wherein the functional analysis of the said company was carried out and it was held to be engaged in the business of software development. The second issue raised by the Revenue is agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said concern had earned 42% of its total revenue from IT consulting (software services), 37% of revenue from education and 21% of the revenue from infrastructure management. The CIT(A) further observed that only segment of software services was comparable with the assessee. He further observed that However, segmental revenue break-up is not provided in the Annual Report. FCS‟s Profit and Loss Account only gives narration as income from software development and other services‟. Therefore, in the absence of the segmental accounts, this company cannot be accepted as comparable with the assessee. Accordingly, I direct the learned AO to exclude FCS Software Ltd. from the list of the comparable companies. 8. The Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r dated 31.01.2017 and was held as under:- 38. The issue raised in ground of appeal No.2 is against exclusion of Infosys Ltd., wherein the TPO had applied the margins of Infosys Ltd., as the assessee itself for three years was selecting L T Infotech Ltd. but was cherry picking in respect of Infosys Ltd. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that first of all, Infosys Ltd. was the product company, hence was functionally not comparable and in respect of L T Infotech Ltd., since segmental details were available, the same were applied to benchmark the international transaction. Our attention was drawn to the final set of comparables prepared by the TPO, wherein also under para 24 while enlisting the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
