DCIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd.

M/S. Te Connectivity Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.300/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17

…milar factors. In support of the above, he relied on the following judicial precedents:- Goldman Sachs (India) Securities (P.) Ltd., 69 taxmann.com 19 Welspun Zucchi Textiles Ltd., 391 ITR 211 IT(TP)A No.300/Bang/2021 Page 17 of 44 Quark Systems (P.) Ltd., 38 SOT 307 Brigade Global Services (P.) Ltd. 28 ITR(T) 411 Sella Synergy India (P.) Ltd., 75 taxmann.com 286 40. As rightly pointed out by the ld. AR, this issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Brigade Global Services P. Ltd. v. ITO, 33 taxmann.com 618 (Hyd. Trib) and Sella Synergy India P. Ltd. v. DCIT, 75 taxmann.com 286 (Chennai Trib) where…

M/S. Infineon Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed partly

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.2870/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Infineon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner 9Th Floor Prestige Of Income-Tax Thirulakshmi Vs. Circle-3(1)(1) No.11 M.G. Road Bengaluru Bengaluru 560 001 Pan No : Aabcs6967N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R. Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Respondent By : D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai: Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 16/10/2017 Passed By The Ld.Dcit Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 144C(13) For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Hereinafter Are Without Prejudice To One Another.

…be denied the right to seek its exclusion before the Tribunal and in this regard the learned counsel for Assessee has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 (CHD - Trib.) for the proposition that the Assessee cannot be precluded from seeking exclusion of a company selected by it in its TP study, when the company is otherwise not comparable to the Assessee. We therefore direct exclusion of the aforesaid 5 companies from the list of comparable companies.' 26. We further know that Hon'ble Karnataka High…

M/S Verifone India Technology Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Verifone India Technology Pvt. Ltd., A 101, 1St Floor, Cyber The Income Tax Park, Plot No. 76, 77 & 78, Officer, Doddathogur Village, Ward – 7 (1) (3), Begur Hobli, Bangalore. Bangalore South Taluk, Vs. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaccv1683K Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Verifone India Technology Pvt. Ltd., A 101, 1St Floor, Cyber The Deputy Park, Plot No. 76, 77 & 78, Commissioner Of Doddathogur Village, Income Tax, Begur Hobli, Circle – 7 (1)(2), Bangalore South Taluk, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaccv1683K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 22-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-03-2022

…be denied the right to seek its exclusion before the Tribunal and in this regard the learned counsel for Assessee has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 (CHD - Trib.) for the proposition that the Assessee cannot be precluded from seeking exclusion of a company selected by it in its TP study, when the company is otherwise not comparable to the Assessee. We therefore direct exclusion of the aforesaid 5 companies from the list of comparable companies.” 22. Admittedly the turnover of Infosys Ltd., R S…

M/S Verifone India Technology Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Verifone India Technology Pvt. Ltd., A 101, 1St Floor, Cyber The Income Tax Park, Plot No. 76, 77 & 78, Officer, Doddathogur Village, Ward – 7 (1) (3), Begur Hobli, Bangalore. Bangalore South Taluk, Vs. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaccv1683K Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Verifone India Technology Pvt. Ltd., A 101, 1St Floor, Cyber The Deputy Park, Plot No. 76, 77 & 78, Commissioner Of Doddathogur Village, Income Tax, Begur Hobli, Circle – 7 (1)(2), Bangalore South Taluk, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaccv1683K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 22-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-03-2022

…be denied the right to seek its exclusion before the Tribunal and in this regard the learned counsel for Assessee has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 (CHD - Trib.) for the proposition that the Assessee cannot be precluded from seeking exclusion of a company selected by it in its TP study, when the company is otherwise not comparable to the Assessee. We therefore direct exclusion of the aforesaid 5 companies from the list of comparable companies.” 22. Admittedly the turnover of Infosys Ltd., R S…

M/S Herbalife International India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

…be precluded from raising an objection against inclusion of a company even if the said company was selected by the assessee in its TP Study. This view was taken by the Special Bench of ITAT, Chandigarh in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 As per the principles laid down in the aforesaid decision of the Special Bench (supra), we admit this additional ground raised by the assessee seeking exclusion of these two companies (i) L & T Infotech Limited (ii) Sasken Communication Technologies Limited without commenting on the merits of the case and remit the matter of their comparability an…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S Herbal Life International India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

…be precluded from raising an objection against inclusion of a company even if the said company was selected by the assessee in its TP Study. This view was taken by the Special Bench of ITAT, Chandigarh in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 As per the principles laid down in the aforesaid decision of the Special Bench (supra), we admit this additional ground raised by the assessee seeking exclusion of these two companies (i) L & T Infotech Limited (ii) Sasken Communication Technologies Limited without commenting on the merits of the case and remit the matter of their comparability an…

M/S Herbalife International India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

…be precluded from raising an objection against inclusion of a company even if the said company was selected by the assessee in its TP Study. This view was taken by the Special Bench of ITAT, Chandigarh in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 As per the principles laid down in the aforesaid decision of the Special Bench (supra), we admit this additional ground raised by the assessee seeking exclusion of these two companies (i) L & T Infotech Limited (ii) Sasken Communication Technologies Limited without commenting on the merits of the case and remit the matter of their comparability an…

M/S Herbalife International India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

…be precluded from raising an objection against inclusion of a company even if the said company was selected by the assessee in its TP Study. This view was taken by the Special Bench of ITAT, Chandigarh in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 As per the principles laid down in the aforesaid decision of the Special Bench (supra), we admit this additional ground raised by the assessee seeking exclusion of these two companies (i) L & T Infotech Limited (ii) Sasken Communication Technologies Limited without commenting on the merits of the case and remit the matter of their comparability an…

M/S Nividia Graphics Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2013-14

…the Assessee before us. Though two out of the three companies were chosen by the Assessee in its TP study, before CIT(A), the Assessee has challenged its inclusion. The Special Bench of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of DCIT v. Quark Systems Pvt. Ltd. 38 SOT 207(SB)(Chd.) has taken the view that it is open to the parties in Transfer Pricing cases to take a stand contrary to their TP study, if they contend that the stand taken in the TP study is contrary to facts or was erroneous. Such a claim cannot be disregarded only on the basis that it is contrary to Assessee’s own stand in the TP study. 9. Before we…

M/S. Aptean India Pvt. Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.2638/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Aptean India Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Formerly Aptean Software India Pvt. Ltd.,) Circle -1(1)(1), Level-5 (8Th Floor), Golden Heights, Bengaluru. No.1/2, 59Th C Cross, 4Th M Block, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560 010. Pan : Aaccp 7154 M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. G. S. Prashanth, Ca Respondent By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.11.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 11.10.2017 Of Dcit, Circle 1(1)(2), Bengaluru, Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called The ‘Act’) Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee In Engaged In The Business Of Provision Of Software Development Services (Swd Services), To Its Wholly Owned Holding Company. In Terms Of The Provisions Of Sec.92-A Of The Act, The Assessee & Its Wholly Owned Holding Company Were Associated Enterprises

…ause the assessee has wrongly added in the list of comparables will not bar the assessee to take objection against the functional dis-similarity of a company as held by the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark System (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 207 (Chd.). Accordingly, we are of the view that the functional comparability of this company is required to be examined. The assessee did not file additional ground to raise this objection therefore in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we remit this issue of comparability of ICRA Techno Analytics limited to the r…

Lloyds Offshore Global Servicew Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.421/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12

…d to inclusion of ICC International Agencies Ltd., as comparable company on several counts at page 05 of the written submission filed before the DRP on 04.12.2015. The Special Bench of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of DCIT v. Quark Systems (P) Ltd. ([2010] 38 SOT 307 (CHD.) (SB) has held that an assessee cannot be precluded from seeking exclusion of a company selected by it in its TP study, when the company is otherwise not comparable to the assessee. We therefore reject that argument of the learned DR in this regard.” Following the above said decision of coordinate bench, we direct exclusion of ICC Internati…

Galax Solutions India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 2565/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Galax E Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Unit No. 4, 8Th Floor, Commissioner Of Innovator Block, Income Tax, Itpl Whitefield Road, Circle – 3(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 066. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcg9007F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri C.J. Brito, Ca : Shri Rajendra Kumar Revenue By Mishra, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24-08-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-10-2021 Order Per Beena Pillai

…n before the Tribunal and in this regard the learned counsel for Assessee has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Page 9 of 11 IT(TP)A No. 2565/Bang/2017 Special Bench of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. Quark Systems (P.) Ltd. [2010] 38 SOT 307 (CHD - Trib.) for the proposition that the Assessee cannot be precluded from seeking exclusion of a company selected by it in its TP study, when the company is otherwise not comparable to the Assessee. We therefore direct exclusion of the aforesaid 5 companies from the list of comparable companies. We further know that Hon’ble Karnataka High Cou…

M/S. Arista Networks India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am It(Tp)A No.2440/Bang/2019 : Asst.Year 2015-2016 M/S.Arista Networks India Private The Dy.Commissioner Of Limited, Global Technology Park Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) V. Bangalore. Tower A & B, 11Th Floor Marathahalli Outer Ring Road Devarabessanhalli, Varthur Hobli Bengaluru – 560 103. Pan : Aaica9663J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Padamchand Khincha Respondent By : Sri.B.K.Panda, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.10.2021 Date Of Hearing : 30.09.2021 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 01.10.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2015-2016. 2. All The Issues Raised In This Appeal Relate To Transfer Pricing Adjustment.

…the said 8 IT(TP)A No.2440/Bang/2019. M/s.Arista Networks India Pvt.Ltd. company has been excluded from comparable list. In this context, the learned AR relied on the order of the Tribunal in the case of CIT v. Quark Systems India Private Limited reported in 4 ITR 606 (Tribunal). 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The turnover of the assessee company is Rs.42.56 crore. The assessee is seeking to exclude nine companies from the list of comparables on account of turnover filter. The nine companies sought to be excluded on account of turnover filter are mentioned at paragraph 6…