ITO v. CRM Services India (P.) Ltd.

48 SOT 41Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#17984 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2018.

Judgments citing ITO v. CRM Services India (P.) Ltd.

The Pr Commissioner of Income -Tax CIT (A) vs. M/S Acusis Software India Pvt. Ltd

ITA/443/2017HC Karnataka02 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 10ASection 260Section 260A

…cannot be excluded from the list of comparables. We place reliance on the following 2 decisions: ( i) Technimount ICB (P.) Ltd. V. Asstt. CIT [2011] 11 taxmann.com 49 (mum.) (ii) ITO V. CRM Services India (P.) Ltd., [2011] 14 taxmann.com 96/48 SOT 41 (RO) (Delhi-Trib.) Date of Judgment 02-07-2018 I.T.A.No.443 /2017 The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, CIT(A) & Anr. Vs. M/s. Acusis Software India Pvt. Ltd., 12/16 Following the ratio laid down in the above cases, we direct the TPO/AO to include this company i…

Franklin Templeton International Services (I) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(1), Mumbai

ITA 7472/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

For Appellant: S/Shri Porus Kaka / Manish KanthFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar-DR

Section 143(3)

…was argued that the reputation of Rastogi group, owning Maple eSolutions Limited was under 6 7472/M/10- M/s. serious indictment. Our attention was drawn towards an order passed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in ITO v. CRM Services India (P.) Ltd. [2011] 48 SOT 41 (URO)/14 taxmann.com 96 for the assessment year 2006-2007 vide which the case of Maple eSolutions Limited has been directed to be excluded for this reason alone. We were also taken through an order passed by the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Capital IQ Information Systems (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2012] 26 taxmann.com 31 whe…

Acusis Software India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 442/BANG/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayana, CAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Sudhakar Rao, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 92C

…herefore this company cannot be excluded from the list of comparables. We place reliance on the following 2 decisions: i) Technimount ICB (P.) Ltd. V. Asstt. CIT [2011] 11 taxmann.com 49 (mum.) ii) ITO V. CRM Services India (P.) Ltd., [2011] 14 taxmann.com 96/48 SOT 41 (RO) (Delhi-Trib.) Following the ratio laid down in the above cases, we direct the TPO/AO to include this company in the list of comparables. vi) M/s. Cosmic Global Limited: The assessee company is seeking inclusion of this company in the list of comparables. There is no dispute about the functional comparability with that of the assessee company…

Icc India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 25/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Icc India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, (Now Known As Mps Ltd.) Circle -11(1), Nsic/Stp Complex, C.R. Building, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaaci1843G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms Vandana Bhandari, Ca Respondent By: Shri S.R. Senapati, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Ms Vandana Bhandari, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.R. Senapati, Sr. DR

…panies was having question-mark in earlier years. In support of the contention for the exclusion of these companies, the Id. AR relied on an order passed by Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. CRM Services India (P) Ltd. (2011) 14 taxmann.com 96/48 SOT 41 (Delhi) (URO), copy placed on pages 141 onwards of the paper book, in which Maple Esolutions Ltd. and Triton Corp. Ltd. were Lirected to be excluded by the Tribunal on this score. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, opposed this contention. 11. We find that there is a direct order by the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal in which these two companies have b…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Telelogic India Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 30/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Mar 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…s of the Tribunal in the following decisions: i. Customer.Com Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, [2012] 28 taxmann.com 258 (Bang.): [2013] 140 ITD 344 (Bang.) : [2013] 21 ITR (Trib.) 514 (Bang.) ii. ITO Vs. CRM Services India (P.) Ltd. [2011] 14 taxmann.com 96 (Del): [2011] 48 SOT 41 (Del) (URO). iii. CSR India (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO [2013] 31 taxmann.com 265 (Bang.) iv. Logica Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, IT(TP)A No. 1129/Bang/2011: TS-131-ITAT-2013-BANG-TP. Avaya India (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT [2013] 33 taxmann.com v. 569 (Del-Trib.) : [2012] 15 ITR (T) 237 (Del-Trib.) vi. ACIT Vs. Sakata Inx. (India) Ltd. [2012] 21 taxmann.com 37 (JP.) :[2012] 53…