9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at all been examined either by the TPO or by learned DRP while re-characterising the assessee as a high-end ITeS/KPO service provider. We restore the issue to the AO for considering assessee s claim that it is a low end ITeS service provider and not a KPO service provider. While doing so, the Assessing Officer must verify all the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee to demonstrate the exact nature of services provided to the AEs. Further, the Assessing Officer will also examine assessee s claim that there is no change in the nature of service provided in earlier years, wherein, it has been accepted as a low end ITeS provider. Needless to mention, the Assessing Officer must provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For coming to such conclusion, the TPO referred to order dated 04-11-2015 passed by the CESTAT in assessee s own case. While considering assessee s objection on this issue, learned DRP observed that the assessee provides services, such as, document review, abstraction services, legal support services, risk management compliance, contract drafting, intellectual property services, etc. However, document review function constitutes approximately 75% of all the functions. Further, learned DRP observed that the assessee has not demonstrated that the balance 25% functions are not intricately linked to its documents review function. Thus, learned DRP ultimately concluded that the assessee is providing high-end ITeS/KPO services. 4. The learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it only performs low-end work of classification of legal documents into different categories and other services based on the manual/feedback provided by the client which does not involve any legal analysis/device. Further, the assessee had submitted that the real issue before the CESTAT as referred to by the TPO was relating to entitlement of CENVAT credit to the assessee and the issue of low-end/high-end ITeS was not before CESTAT. The assessee has further stated that in appeal filed by the Service-tax department in High Court, assessee has been clearly mentioned as a BPO service provider. We have further noticed that voluminous documentary evidences have been submitted by the assessee before the TPO and learned DRP to demonstrate the nat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... services provided to the AEs. Further, the Assessing Officer will also examine assessee s claim that there is no change in the nature of service provided in earlier years, wherein, it has been accepted as a low end ITeS provider. Needless to mention, the Assessing Officer must provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before deciding the issue. 7. In view of our decision above, all other issues raised by the assessee have become academic at this stage, hence, do not require adjudication. However, all these issues are left open for decision if need arises in future. 8. In the result, assessee s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 24 /02/2021. - - TaxTM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
