9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 2028X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounds of the appeal before us. However at the time of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that he is only pressing ground no. 4, whereas the rest of the grounds are not pressed. Therefore, the rest of the grounds are dismissed as not pressed . The ground No. 4 is as under:- 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the honourable CIT (Appeal) - 13, Pune erred in confirming the inclusion of Universal Print Systems Limited in the list of comparable companies by the learned TPO without appreciating the fact that: a) The said company is not comparable with the appellant since the functions performed by the company are different than that performed by the appellant and the scale of operations and turnover of the said company is substantially higher than that of the appellant. b) The revenue from ITES segment is 21.63% of the total revenue and it does not satisfy the filter, companies with income from IT enabled services 50% of the operating revenue or segmental revenue are selected , introduced by the learned TPO. 3. The brief facts are that the assessee is wholly owned subsidiary of Credit Pointe owned, USA. The assessee is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue: The assessee wishes to state that the company does not satisfy the selection criteria for the comparables with Income from ITES 50% of the Operating Revenue or Segmental Revenue are selected. adopted by your honour yourself. The income of company Universal Print Systems Limited from ITES segment as per the annual report is 21.63% of the total operating revenue or segmental revenue. The calculation is as under: Sr No. Particulars Amount A) Revenue from ITES segment 6,17,67,000 B) Total Operating or Segmental Revenue 28,55,14,000 C) Percentage of [TES / Total Revenue 21.63% The assessee wishes to state that Universal Print Systems Limited is not functionally comparable to the assessee. The assessee provides support services in the nature of data entry, data compilation data cleaning and data structuring to suit the requirements of the Credit Pointe Inc. Us. Universal Print Systems Limited derives its revenues m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stment is to be allowed. However, the learned TPO did not consider the same while calculating the PLI after Working Capital Adjustments. The copy of calculation of PLI after Working Capital Adjustments is appearing on page no. 129 of the paper book. The Appellant prayed that the correct PLI after WCA of Universal Print Systems Ltd. be taken i.e. 39.94% for the purpose of calculating average PLI and arm's length price be recomputed. The appellant requested to exclude Universal Print Systems Limited in the list of comparable companies as the revenue from ITES segment is 21.63% of the total revenue and it does not satisfy the said filter introduced by the learned TP The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case, the submissions of the assessee has upheld the order of the TPO including thereby Universal Print Systems Ltd in the list of comparables companies. 6. At the time of hearing, the Ld. A.R. vehemently argued that the Universal Print Systems Ltd is functionally different from that of the assessee and further submitted that neither the TPO nor the Ld. CIT(A) in their respective orders have discussed and analysed the functional details of Uni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Pre-press BPO and for our study, only the Pre-press BPO segment has been considered. Therefore, filters are to be applied only on the figures of this segment. The company was specifically asked to furnish the details of employee cost U/S 133(6) of the Act. Vide its' letter dated 18/12/2015, the company has furnished P L a/c of Pre press BPO segment, from which it is seen that the 'employee cost relating to Pre-Press BPO segment is Rs. 268. 76(Lacs). The employee cost of Rs 268.76(Lacs) turnover of Rs 611.96 (Lakhs) works out to 44%. Therefore, this comparable clears the employee- cost filter. The response received from the company u/s 133(6) of the Act has been attached with this order. (Annexure-G) The TPO has used only current data for the F.Y 2011-12. The corrected margin is 52.46%. The Hon'ble DRP also confirmed the findings of TPO. ii) Being aggrieved, the assessee-company is before us. It is contended by the assessee that this company fail revenue filter more than 75% from ITES segment and also functionally not comparable with that of the assessee-company and also fails the filter of earnings from export against 75% of the total revenue and also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
