M/S INFINERA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1096/BANG/2011Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 December 2018AY 2007-082 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed a previous decision which held that M/s. Megasoft Ltd. should be considered a good comparable after segmentation. Therefore, the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer was directed to consider M/s. Megasoft Ltd. as a comparable after segmentation of its results.

What were the facts?

The appeal was recalled to adjudicate the comparability of M/s. Megasoft in the software segment. This issue was previously decided by a co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the comparability of M/s. Megasoft Ltd. as a comparable company in the software segment for transfer pricing purposes.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU

Before: SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

For Appellant: Shri Ali Asger, CA
For Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 20/11/2018Pronounced: 05/12/2018

M/s.Infinera India Pvt. Ltd. Prestige Solitaire, 401, Level 4, No.6, Brunton Road, Bengaluru-560025. PAN: AABCI 1411 R … Appellant Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 11(2), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant by : Shri Ali Asger, CA. Respondent by : Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 20/11/2018 Date of pronouncement : 05/12/2018 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM :

This is an appeal recalled in the order passed by this Tribunal vide order dated 06/07/2018 in Misc.Pen.No.121/Bang/2018 to adjudicate the comparability of the company M/s.Megasoft in the software segment. This issue is covered by the decision of the co- ordinate bench of Tribunal in the case of Tesco Hindustan Service Centre Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT (77 taxmann.com 48) and Core Objects India (P) Ltd. vs. ITO 72 taxmann.com 53(Bang.Trib). The relevant observation of the Tribunal in the case of Core Objects India (P) Ltd. (supra) is as follows:

“17. The next company for which exclusion is being requested is M/s Megasoft Ltd. It is submitted by the ld.AR of the assessee that about this company, the discussion is available on pages 34 to 36 of the Tribunal order rendered in the case of Hewlett-Packard (India) Globalsoft (P.) Ltd. (supra). We find that in this case, it was held

IT(TP)A No.1096/Bang/2011 Page 2 of 2 by the Tribunal that M/s Megasoft Ltd. should be considered as a good comparable after segmentation and therefore, in the present case, we direct the AO/TPO to consider this company i.e. M/s Megasoft Ltd., (supra) as a comparable after segmentation of its result.” Respectfully following the ratio of the above decision, this ground of appeal is allowed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →