M/S THOMSON REUTERS INTERNATIONAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

ITA 542/BANG/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 December 2025AY 2010-1165 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's Transfer Pricing (TP) documentation was prepared bona fide and in compliance with the Act and Rules. It found that the TPO erred in conducting a fresh benchmarking analysis using only current year data and in rejecting the assessee's comparability analysis without proper justification. The Tribunal also held that the denial of deduction under Section 10A for the UB Plaza STPI Unit was incorrect, as the unit was a continuation of an existing eligible undertaking and not a new business formed by acquiring used assets. The Tribunal relied on Circular No. 1 dated 17/01/2013, stating that a slump sale does not result in splitting or reconstruction of business, and a change in ownership alone cannot deny Section 10A deduction. Similarly, the denial of Section 10A deduction for the Titanium STPI Unit and the unit acquired from RIPL was held to be erroneous, as these were considered eligible undertakings. The Tribunal further held that the claim for depreciation on goodwill in respect of undertakings acquired from TBI and RIPL was allowable, as the conditions for claiming depreciation on intangible assets were met. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the comparability analysis and grant the eligible deductions and depreciation.

What were the facts?

These appeals by the assessee, M/s. Thomson Corporation (International) Pvt. Ltd., and the revenue arise from the final assessment order dated 29/01/2025, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2010-11. The order was passed in conformity with the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), Bangalore. The core of the dispute revolves around the transfer pricing adjustments made by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and the denial of deduction under Section 10A of the Act for various units of the assessee. The assessee contends that its Transfer Pricing documentation was prepared bona fide and in compliance with the Act and Rules, and that the denial of Section 10A benefits for its UB Plaza, Titanium, and Reuters India Private Limited (RIPL) acquired units, as well as the denial of depreciation on goodwill, were erroneous.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal had to decide whether the learned AO/DRP erred in rejecting the Appellant's Transfer Pricing (TP) documentation and in upholding the TPO's fresh benchmarking analysis using current year data, thereby substituting the Appellant's analysis with their own conjectures and assumptions, and applying inconsistent comparability criteria. The assessee argued that its TP documentation was prepared bona fide and in compliance with the Act and Rules, and that the TPO erred in rejecting its comparability analysis and applying inappropriate filters. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the provided text. 2. Whether the Tribunal had to decide whether the learned AO/DRP erred in denying deduction under Section 10A of the Act in respect of the UB Plaza STPI Unit, considering it was a continuation of an existing undertaking and not a new business formed by acquisition of previously used assets. The assessee contended that the deduction is undertaking-specific, not assessee-specific, and that Circular No. 1 dated 17/01/2013 supports the claim despite a change in ownership via slump sale. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded. 3. Whether the Tribunal had to decide whether the learned AO/DRP erred in denying deduction under Section 10A of the Act in respect of the Titanium STPI Unit, which the assessee claimed was a newly established undertaking eligible for deduction. The assessee argued it was a new unit fulfilling all conditions and that deduction is undertaking-specific. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded. 4. Whether the Tribunal had to decide whether the learned AO/DRP erred in denying deduction under Section 10A of the Act in respect of the unit acquired from Reuters India Private Limited (RIPL) via slump sale, as the assessee claimed it fulfilled the conditions for deduction. The assessee relied on Circular No. 1 dated 17/01/2013. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded. 5. Whether the Tribunal had to decide whether the learned AO/DRP erred in denying the claim for depreciation on goodwill under Section 32 of the Act in respect of undertakings acquired from Thomson Business Information India Private Limited (TBI) and RIPL.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10A,Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 32

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna a/w, Ms. Riddhi Maru & Ms. Tejal Saraf, ARs
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT D/R
Hearing: 02.12.2025Pronounced: 31.12.2025

Heard together (3 matters)

I.T.A. No. 234/Bang/2015
I.T.A. No. 843/Bang/2015
I.T.A. No. 542/Bang/2015

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Smt. Beena Pillai, JM: Present appeals filed by assessee as well as revenue arises out of final assessment order dated 29/01/2025 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 10A

All 2,147 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →