Global Logic India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

134 Taxmann.com 35Reported decision2022#4607 most cited

What is Global Logic India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Where a company sought exclusion of a comparable based on functional dissimilarity and lack of publicly available segmental profitability, and this was accepted by the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer in a prior decision, that decision is followed to exclude the comparable.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Global Logic India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT · 134 Taxmann.com 35 · 2022 · functional dissimilarity · comparable companies · Inteq Software Pvt. Ltd · exclusion of comparable · Transfer Pricing Officer · Assessing Officer

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 1961Section 10AASection 10B(3)Section 144BSection 144C of the Income Tax ActSection 234A

Issues it is cited on

captive service providerinterest on outstanding receivablessection 92b(1)working capital adjustmentrelated party transactionsection 92dsection 92bfunctional analysiscomparable companiessection 92c(3)transactional net margin methodinterest under section 234c

Judgments citing Global Logic India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

Arm Embedded Technologies Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 235/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Aug 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: 2.1 Rejecting the value of international transaction of provision of SWD and proFor Respondent: Shri T. Suryanarayana
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 235/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Arm Embedded Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Bagmane World Technology Center, The Deputy SEZ Citrine Block, Commissioner of 5th Floor, Marathahalli Income Tax, Outer Ring Road, Circle 1 (1)(1), Doddanekkundi Village, Vs. Bengaluru. Mahadevapura, Bengaluru – 560 048. PAN: AAECA1582E APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Assessee by Advocate Revenue by : Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 27-07-2022 Date…

Citrix R & D India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed partly as indicated herein above

ITA 220/BANG/2021[2016-17`]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2022

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 220/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Citrix R&D India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Prestige Dynasty, Commissioner Of Ground Floor, Income Tax, 33/2, Ulsoor Road, Circle – 2(1)(1), Bangalore – 560042. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcn3639C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sumit Khurana, Ca Revenue By : Shri M. Mathivanan, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Assessment Order Dated 30/03/2021 Passed By The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2016-17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein By The Appellant Are Without Prejudice To One Another. 1. That The Order Passed By The Learned Ao To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant, Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. Transfer Pricing - 2. That The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Bangalore ("Assessing Officer" Or "Learned Ao") & The Dispute Resolution Panel - 1 ("Learned Panel" Or "Learned Drp")

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Khurana, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, CIT-DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 220/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Citrix R&D India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Prestige Dynasty, Commissioner of Ground Floor, Income Tax, 33/2, Ulsoor Road, Circle – 2(1)(1), Bangalore – 560042. Vs. Bangalore. PAN: AABCN3639C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sumit Khurana, CA Revenue by : Shri M. Mathivanan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04-07-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 25-08-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal by the assesse…

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

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

ITA 2385/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Sumeet Khurana, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92D

…IT(TP)A No.2385/Bang/2019 M/s. Airbus Group India Private Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.2385/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Airbus Group India Pvt. Ltd. 4th Floor, Xylem, Plot No.4&4A Dyavasandra Industrial Area Deputy Commissioner of Mahadevpura Post Income-tax Vs. Whitefield Road Circle – 1(1)(1) Bangalore 560 048. Bangalore PAN NO : AAGCA1513R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sumeet Khurana, A.R. Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R. Dat…

M/S. Meritor C vs. India Private Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 249/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…own case for AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16. Respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench, we direct the AO/TPO to exclude this company from the final list of comparables. 4.13 Further, the Tribunal in the case of Global Logic India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 134 Taxmann.com 35 wherein held as under:- “INFOBEANS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. (INFOBEANS) 44. The taxpayer sought exclusion of Infobeans as a comparable again on ground of functional dissimilarity, it also being into providing services viz. software engineering services primarily in Custom Application Development (CAD), Content Management Systems, Enterprise Mobi…

Airlinq Technology Private Limited (Formerly Known As Globetouch Technologies Private Limited), Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 231/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.231/Bang/2021 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/S.Airlinq Technology Pvt. Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Globe Touch Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1) V. Bangalore. Technologies Private Limited) 306, 100 Feet Road, Binna Mangala Stage – 1, Indiranagar Bangalore – 560 038. Pan : Aafcg7626L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : S/Sri.Ajit Kumar Jain & Siddesh Chaugule, Cas Respondent By : Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2022 Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 29.03.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2016-2017. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Was Incorporated On 15.10.2014 As A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of Globetouch Inc, Usa. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Rendering Software Development Services (Swd) To Globetouch Inc. For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, The Return Of Income Was Filed Declaring An Income Of Rs.4,23,01,510 Under The Normal Provisions Of The Income-Tax Act. The Assessment Was Selected

For Appellant: S/Sri.Ajit Kumar Jain & Siddesh Chaugule, CAsFor Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, AM IT(TP)A No.231/Bang/2021 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/s.Airlinq Technology Pvt. Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner of (Formerly known as Globe Touch Income-tax, Circle 3(1)(1) v. Bangalore. Technologies Private Limited) 306, 100 Feet Road, Binna Mangala Stage – 1, Indiranagar Bangalore – 560 038. PAN : AAFCG7626L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : S/Sri.Ajit Kumar Jain & Siddesh Chaugule, CAs Respondent by : Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 28.07.2022 Date of Hearin…