9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o whisper about these grounds during the hearing of the appeal, as such the Tribunal recorded a finding in para 29 of its order that no other grounds were pressed in the TP matters, other than what is adjudicated by the Tribunal in its order. Being so, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Tribunal on this issue. Accordingly, the MP filed by the assessee is dismissed. Comparability of KALS Information Systems Ltd - The Tribunal committed an error in giving finding in para 43 of its order. Accordingly, para 43 of the order of the Tribunal dated 24.11.2021 is modified and substituted to read as follows:- 43. Accordingly, this comparable to be excluded in the list of comparables. Except the above, there is no change i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e submissions of the assessee in respect of these grounds were included in the written submissions filed by the assessee before the Tribunal and he drew our attention to para J of the written submissions on this issue which are as follows:- J. NON-GRANT OF WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT (Ground Nos. 9 and 10): In this regard, it is submitted that the TPO computed the working capital adjustment at 2.09%. However, the same was restricted to 1.98% without providing any basis or working for arriving at the upper cap for working capital adjustment. On appeal, the CIT(A) disallowed the working capital adjustment granted by the TPO on the ground that there would be no impact of working capital difference on the profitability of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Also, it is submitted that the action of the TPO in restricting the working capital adjustment is completely erroneous. The IT Rules do not provide for the requirement of application of any cap or upper limit to such adjustments In this regard, the assessee places reliance on the decision of this Hon'ble Tribunal in ARM Embedded Technologies P. Ltd v. DCIT [(2015) 64 taxmann.com 445]. Therefore, it is submitted that since it is now a settled proposition of law that necessary adjustments are to be made to the margins of comparables to give effect to the differences in the working capital positions of the tested party and of the comparables, the CIT(A) ought to have granted the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gly, the MP filed by the assessee is dismissed. MP No.4/Bang/2022 8. In this miscellaneous petition, the ld. AR submitted that in the revenue s appeal with regard to comparability of KALS Information Systems Ltd. it was argued by the assessee before the Tribunal that this comparable is to be excluded as against the argument of the ld. DR that it has to be included in the list of comparables. The Tribunal dealt with this issue in paras 40 to 43 of its order and placing reliance on the earlier order of the Tribunal in the case of Trilogy e-business Services Software India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT, [2013] 140 ITR 540 / 29 taxmann.com 310 (Bang. Trib.), it was observed in para 42 that this company has to be excluded. However, in para 43, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
