How many judgments cite CIT v. Mercer Consulting (India) P. Ltd.?

35 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Mercer Consulting (India) P. Ltd. (390 ITR 615), spanning 2018 to 2023.

CIT v. Mercer Consulting (India) P. Ltd.

390 ITR 615High Court2017#3384 most cited

What is CIT v. Mercer Consulting (India) P. Ltd. authority for?

A company's financial year ending differing from the assessment year is a valid ground for rejecting it as a comparable in transfer pricing analysis.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Mercer Consulting (India) P. Ltd. · 390 ITR 615 · comparable company · financial year ending · transfer pricing

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 144c(8)installation pe safe harbour rules convertible foreign exchange multiple year data section 14a disallowance safe harbour far analysis r&d expenditure section 92c(2)working capital adjustment section 92f

Judgments citing CIT v. Mercer Consulting (India) P. Ltd.

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Sri. Jivheshwara Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 349/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jaya Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R

Section 10A

…upra) and held that Infosys BPO was rightly excluded as not being a comparable company. Our attention was also drawn by him to a decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Mercer Consulting (I) (P) Ltd. [2016] 76 taxmann.com 153/390 ITR 615 wherein the Hon'ble Court held that a giant company cannot be compared with a company which was a captive service provided assuming limited risks. 17.6 As far as the decisions of the Tribunal rendered on the application of turnover filter that are contrary to the decision rendered in the case IT(TP)A Nos.349 & 878/Bang/2014 M/s. Mindtree Ltd., B…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Netlink Software (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6782/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Netlink Software Pvt. Ltd., Vs Ito, S.P. Nagrath & Co. Llp, Ward-18(1), A-380, Ground Floor, Cr Building, Defence Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaccn5731A Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ito, Vs. Netlink Software Pvt. Ltd., Ward-18(1), S.P. Nagrath & Co. Llp, Cr Building, A-380, Ground Floor, New Delhi. Defence Colony, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccn5731A (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri Gagan Kumar, Advocate Deptt. By : Ms Nidhi Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, Advocate

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 253Section 92C

…ecember, 2010 and the data for the quarter ending 31.03.2010 and 31.03.2011 (both audited) are available in public domain. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mercer Consulting (I) Pvt. Ltd., reported in 390 ITR 615, he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that a company following different financial year can be adopted as comparable if data for relevant period is available. Relying on various other decisions, he submitted that under identical circumstances the various Benches of the Tribunal have held that if it is possible to…

International Speciality Products (India) P Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6335/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

…03 (Mumbai- Trib.) for the Assessment Year 2009-10  Maersk Global Service Centre India Private Limited v/s. ACIT reported in [2018] 100 taxmann.com 435 (Mum-Trib) for the Assessment Year 2012-13.  CIT v/s. Mercer Consulting India P. Ltd. reported in [2017] 390 ITR 615 (Punjab & Haryana) for the Assessment Year 2008-09 10. Learned counsel submitted that upon extrapolating details of quarterly result margin of the said company comes to 14.64%. Accordingly, learned counsel prayed that the issue may be remanded back to the TPO with direction to include the said R Systems International Ltd. in final list of compara…

Asst CIT 10(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Pangea3 Legal Database P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1923/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Singh-Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “जे” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी श""जीत दे, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1663/Mum.2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Pangea3 Legal Database Systems Pvt. Ltd. ACIT-10(3)(2) बनाम नाम नाम/ नाम Room No.212, 2nd floor 102-B, Leela Business Park Andheri Kurla Road Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 060 Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AADCP-8581-H…

Pangea Legal Database Systems Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, 10(3)(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1663/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Singh-Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

DCIT-14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Iiml Assets Advisors Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5261/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan

…e. Thus, he submitted, the company being otherwise functionally similar to the assessee should be included as comparable. In support, learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Mercer Consulting India Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 390 ITR 615 (P&H); ii) CIT v/s Mc Kinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.217/2014, dated 27.03.2015 (Del. HC); iii) Aegis Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2017] 78 taxmann.com 275 (Mum.); and iv) Advise Market Software Development Centre Pvt. Ltd. v/s ITO, [2018] 94 taxmann.com 179 (Bang.). 9. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relying upon the observ…

J.P Morgan Advisors India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 990/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…le difference, if, it is otherwise comparable. Thus, ultimately, the Tribunal directed for inclusion of the company as a comparable. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court while dealing with identical issue in CIT v/s Mercer Consulting India Pvt. Ltd, [2017] 390 ITR 615 (P&H) also approved the aforesaid view of the Tribunal. In Capital IQ Information System India Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT, [2014] 49 taxmann.com 313 (Trib. Hyd.) following the decision in Mercer Consulting India Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT (supra), the Tribunal included the company as a comparable. Respectfully following the decisions cited supra, we direct the A…

Broadcom Communications Technologies Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1929/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

…d reliance on two judicial pronouncements being a Tribunal order rendered in the case of Capco Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (97 taxmannn.com 71) and a judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Mercer Consulting (India) (P) Ltd.,390 ITR 615. Copy of this Tribunal order in the case of Capco Technologies Pvt. Ltd. is available on pages 1068 to 1085 of the case law compilation. Our attention was drawn to paras 17 to 19 for Akshay Software Technologies Limited, paras 20 to 22 in respect of Evoke Technologies Ltd. and para 24 in respect of R Systems International Limited and it was point…

ITO 10(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Jardine Lloyed Thompson P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2181/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan

…s own case for the assessment year 2008–09, the Tribunal has rejected this company as a comparable. In support of his contention, the learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Mercer Consulting India Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 390 ITR 615 (P&H); ii) WNS Global Service Pvt. Ltd. v/s ITO, [2019] 103 taxmann.com 75 (Mum.); iii) Excellence Data Research Pvt. Ltd. v/s ITO, [2014] 49 taxmann.com 409 (Hyd.); and iv) Capital IQ Information Systems India Pvt. Ltd. v/s ADIT, [2014] 49 taxmann.com 313 (Hyd.). 15. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. We ha…

ACIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Orbimed Advisors India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal and the cross objections by the

ITA 2653/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No.2653 /Mum/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit 3(2)(2), Orbimed Advisors India Private Limited, Mumbai Suite- F8E, Grand Hyatt Plaza, Vs. Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 055. Pan : Aabco0901A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Siddhesh Chagule & Ajit Kumar JainFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)

…e comparable followed different financial years that by itself does not make the company incomparable, if otherwise, it is functionally similar to the assessee. This view has been accepted by the Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in Mercer Consulting India Pvt. Ltd. 390 ITR 615. Therefore, following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mercer Consulting India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) we in principle agree that even though the comparable may be following a different financial year, however, if the financial data of the comparable relating to the financial year followed by the assessee is available and whi…

Approva Systems Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2444/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

…) 298 CTR 0197 (Bom) has held that a party is not barred in law from withdrawing from its list of comparables, a company included on account of mistake. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Ltd [TS-446-HC-2016(DEL)-TP] and the Hon’ble Punjab & (2017) 390 ITR 615 (P&H). In view of the foregoing discussion, 6 Approva Systems Private Limited we do not find any substance in the preliminary objection taken by the ld. DR. 6. Now we turn to examine the actual comparability of Vama Industries Ltd. Before proceeding to analyze the comparability of this company, it would be befitting to consider the functional…

Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 507/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)

…n Xchanging Technology Services India Pvt. Ltd. [TS-446-HC- 2016(DEL)-TP]. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Tata Power Solar Systems Ltd. [TS-1007-HC-2016(BOM)-TP] and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Mercer Consulting (India) P. Ltd. (2017) 390 ITR 615 (P&H) have also approved similar view. In view of the foregoing discussion, we do not find any substance in the preliminary objection taken by the ld. DR. 44. Coming to the comparability or otherwise of this company, we find from its Profit & Loss Account that its income from ‘Sale of software services and products’ stands at Rs. 6,101.27 millio…

DCIT vs. M/S Emc Data Storage Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 875/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia & Shri. Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Suryanarayana J. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT - DR

Section 10A

…ed six comparables, on the basis of the average of two years ending on 30.09.2004 and 30.09.2005. It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the matter of Mercer Consulting India P. Ltd [2016] 76 taxmann.com 153 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2017] 390 ITR 615 as under: 31. The Rule does not exclude from consideration the data of an entity merely because its financial year is different from the financial year of the assessee. What the Rule requires is that the data to be used in analyzing the financial results of an uncontrolled transaction with an international transaction shall be the data relating t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Microfoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the

ITA 691/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…osts etc. for the relevant financial year are not directly available without any apportionment or truncation, then this company should not be considered as comparable. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Mercer Consuling (India) P. Ltd. (2017) 390 ITR 615 (P&H) has approved the similar view of the Tribunal by holding : `that if the data relating to the financial year in which the international transaction has been entered into is directly available from the annual accounts of that comparable, then it cannot be held as not passing the test of sub-rule(4) of rule 10B.’ We direct accordingly. (ii) C…

Inductis India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed in

ITA 1203/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Paramita M. Biswas, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 92D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-2’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Inductis India Pvt. Ltd., vs ACIT, 414, 4th Floor, DLF Jasola Tower B, Circle-12(1), Plot No. 10 & 11, DDA District New Delhi. Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (PAN: AAACI8497C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Respondent by: Ms Paramita M. Biswas, CIT DR Date of hearing: 21.05.2018 Date of pronouncement: 20.08.2018 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee a…