CIT v. PTC Software (I) Pvt. Ltd.

395 ITR 176High Court2017#3917 most cited

What is CIT v. PTC Software (I) Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Companies with different financial year endings cannot be considered comparable for transfer pricing analysis. Similarly, KPO service providers should not be compared to BPO service providers.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. PTC Software · 395 ITR 176 · financial year difference · comparable companies · transfer pricing · KPO vs BPO · functional dissimilarity

Issues it is cited on

comparable companiestransfercompanyindiabusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. PTC Software (I) Pvt. Ltd.

Accenture Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1671/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalaa/w Shri Hiten ChandeFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBERAND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.1671/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Accenture Services Pvt. Ltd. Plant no.3, Godrej & Boyce Complex Phirojshah Nagar, Vikhroli West ……………. Appellant Off LBS Marg, Mumbai 400 079 PAN – AACCA8997K v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–3(1), Mumbai ITA no.1110/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–3(1), Mumbai v/s Accenture Services Pvt. Ltd. 14th Floor, The Ruby 29, Senapati Bapat Marg…

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

…data relating to the financial year in which the international transaction has taken place. Thus, he submitted, this company cannot be treated as comparable. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s PTC Software India Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 395 ITR 176 (Bom.); ii) DCIT v/s Ocwen Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., [2018] 96 taxmann.com 505 (Pune); and iii) Dover India Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2017] 81 taxmann.com 245 (Pune); and iv) CIT v/s Principal Global Services Pvt. Ltd., [2018] 95 taxmann.com 315 (Bom.). 10. Further, the learned Departmental Representative submitted, in assessment year 2008–09 th…

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)

…9 of PB II) Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Pangea3 & Legal Database Systems Pvt. Lid [ITA Nos.2128 &1958/M/2014] The Revenue on the other hand has relied upon decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. PTC Software India P. Ltd.(2017) 395 ITR 176(Bom.) , wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court held as under:- “(a) The Assessing Officer on the basis of the order of the TPO included M/s. Transworks Information Services Ltd. (Transworks Ltd.) in his comparability analysis. The grievance of the respondent assessee before the Tribunal was that Transwork Ltd. cannot be a comparable as the respondent…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S. John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 575/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.518/PUN/15 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s.John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, Circle-14, Cybercity, Magarpatta City, Pune Vs. Hadapsar, Pune – 411 028 PAN : AAACJ4233B (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.575/PUN/15 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 ACIT, Circle-14, M/s.John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune Vs. Cybercity, Magarpatta City, Hadapsar, Pune – 411 028 PAN : AAACJ4233B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nikh…

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 518/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.518/PUN/15 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s.John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, Circle-14, Cybercity, Magarpatta City, Pune Vs. Hadapsar, Pune – 411 028 PAN : AAACJ4233B (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.575/PUN/15 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 ACIT, Circle-14, M/s.John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune Vs. Cybercity, Magarpatta City, Hadapsar, Pune – 411 028 PAN : AAACJ4233B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nikh…

Pr Commissioner of vs. M/S Softbrands India

ITA/536/2015HC Karnataka25 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

…urt in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Pune Vs. Date of Judgment 25-06-2018 I.T.A.No.536/2015 C/w I.T.A.No.537/2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Softbrands India P. Ltd., 72/80 PTC Software (I)(P) Ltd. [2017] 395 ITR 176 (Bombay) again reiterated similar position with reference to various comparables with regard to one of the comparables, M/s. KALS Information Solutions Limited whose case was in the appeals before us as well, held that that if there is a functionality difference between the two comparables and the Tribunal was justified in excluding th…

Pr Commissioner of vs. M/S Softbrands India

ITA/537/2015HC Karnataka25 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

…urt in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Pune Vs. Date of Judgment 25-06-2018 I.T.A.No.536/2015 C/w I.T.A.No.537/2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Softbrands India P. Ltd., 72/80 PTC Software (I)(P) Ltd. [2017] 395 ITR 176 (Bombay) again reiterated similar position with reference to various comparables with regard to one of the comparables, M/s. KALS Information Solutions Limited whose case was in the appeals before us as well, held that that if there is a functionality difference between the two comparables and the Tribunal was justified in excluding th…

M/S Advice America Software Development Centre Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2531/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

…f comparable companies. 24. The learned DR however submitted that Data to be used for comparability should be the same financial year and in this regard placed reliance on decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. PTC Software (I) Pvt.Ltd. 395 ITR 176 (Bom.) & Mumbai ITAT in the case of Tevapharm India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2017) 81 taxmann.com 416(Mum- Trib) wherein it was held that data to be used for comparability analysis should be the same Financial year in which the international transactions were entered into by the Assessee. He also submitted that the question whether this company passes…

Asst CIT 15(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Maersk Global Services Centre (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 944/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.944/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिाम/ Acit 15(2)(2) Maersk Global Services R.No. 403, 4 T H Floor, Centre (I) P. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, 4T H & 5T H Floor, V. M.K Road, Prudential Bldg, Mumbai-400020 Central Avenue Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai-400076 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aadcm7786M (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri. V. Jenardhanan,DR
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “K” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.944/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिाम/ ACIT 15(2)(2) Maersk Global Services R.No. 403, 4 t h floor, Centre (I) P. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, 4t h & 5t h Floor, v. M.K Road, Prudential Bldg, Mumbai-400020 Central Avenue Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai-400076 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AADCM7786M (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) CO. No.50/Mum/2016 arising out of आयकर…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. M/s Satyasai Bhavani Hsopitals Private Limited

ITTA/537/2015HC Telangana02 Nov 2015

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY