M/s. Symantec Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT

46 SOT 48Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#7170 most cited

What is M/s. Symantec Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

The TNMM method requires a comparison of the net profit margin realized from the international transaction, not the enterprise-level profit margin.

16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

M/s. Symantec Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT · TNMM · transfer pricing · net profit margin · international transaction · enterprise level profits · segmental results · 46 SOT 48

Judgments citing M/s. Symantec Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT

Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4062/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 4062/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 15 Dsidc, Okhla Industrial Area, Circle-10(2), Phase-Ii, Scheme-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcg2938H Assessee By : Sh. Pancham Sethi, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.07.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated Xx.02.2019 Passed By The Ao U/S 254/143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee:

For Appellant: Sh. Pancham Sethi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. DR
Section 234BSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…(Mum) wherein it had been held that TNMM does not permit comparison at enterprise level profits, it requires comparison of net margin realized from an international transaction (Xix) xxxxxx Software Solutions (P.) Ltd. Vs. Asstt. CIT (2011) 11 Taxmann.com 264/46 SOT 48 (Mum.) wherein it had been held that TNMM required comparison of net margin realized from the international transaction and not enterprise level margin; (c) Technimount ICB (P) Ltd. [2011-TII-31- ITAT-Mum-TP] wherein it had been held that segmental results are to be considered and not the profit at entity level; (xi) Twinkle 14 Gruner India Pvt. L…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. 24/7 Customer Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 228/BANG/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No. 228/Bang/2020 Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. 24/7 Customer Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Embassy Golflinks Business Commissioner Of Park, Income Tax, Challaghatta Village, Circle – 2 (1)(1), Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore. Vs. Varthur Hobli, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aaacz1014A Appellant Respondent : Shri Jeepan Nagpal & Mrs. Assessee By Pallavi Sharma, Ca : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue By Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17-05-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 29/11/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-2, Bangalore For A.Y. 2005- 06 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Grounds Of Appeal & Question Of Law: A) The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Fact Seeking Exact Comparability Under Tnnm?

For Respondent: Shri Jeepan Nagpal & Mrs
Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…s India (P.) Ltd. [2012] 17 taxmann.com 16 (Bang.) and M/s Meritor LVS India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2015] 64 taxmann. com 136 (Bangalore - Trib.) and also decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai bench in the case of M/s. Symantec Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (2011) 46 SOT 48 (Mumbai). g) The learned CIT (A) has erred in granting adjustment on depreciation when the taxpayer 's profit margin even before the depreciation claim is not at arm's length. h) The learned CIT (A) has erred in granting depreciation adjustment without considering three years data of the taxpayer and the comparable companies as the effect of charge…

Headstrong Services India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our observations contained in the preceding paragraphs

ITA 508/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92BSection 92C

…fer pricing. If an assessee wants to take previous years data, then burden is on the assessee to demonstrate that previous year’s data contained certain facts which would influence determination of transfer pricing. iii. Symnetac Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 46 SOT 48, wherein it is held that Rule 10B(4) manifest that generally data of financial year in which international transaction has been entered into to be used for analyzing comparability of uncontrolled transaction in order to determine ALP. Using data of comparables pertaining to the same period during which international transaction took place because i…

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

ITA 3168/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-I(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2219 & 2220/Bang/2017 & 3168/Bang/2017 Assessment years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s. Herbalife International India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Private Ltd., of Income Tax, # 14, Commissariat Road, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 025. Bangalore. PAN: AAACH 8025R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Herbalife International India of Income Tax, Private Ltd., Circle 3(1)(2), # 14, Commissariat Road, Bangalore. B…

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

ITA 2587/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-I(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2219 & 2220/Bang/2017 & 3168/Bang/2017 Assessment years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s. Herbalife International India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Private Ltd., of Income Tax, # 14, Commissariat Road, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 025. Bangalore. PAN: AAACH 8025R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Herbalife International India of Income Tax, Private Ltd., Circle 3(1)(2), # 14, Commissariat Road, Bangalore. B…

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

ITA 2220/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-I(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2219 & 2220/Bang/2017 & 3168/Bang/2017 Assessment years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s. Herbalife International India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Private Ltd., of Income Tax, # 14, Commissariat Road, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 025. Bangalore. PAN: AAACH 8025R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Herbalife International India of Income Tax, Private Ltd., Circle 3(1)(2), # 14, Commissariat Road, Bangalore. B…

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

ITA 2219/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-I(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2219 & 2220/Bang/2017 & 3168/Bang/2017 Assessment years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s. Herbalife International India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Private Ltd., of Income Tax, # 14, Commissariat Road, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 025. Bangalore. PAN: AAACH 8025R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Herbalife International India of Income Tax, Private Ltd., Circle 3(1)(2), # 14, Commissariat Road, Bangalore. B…

M/S. Atmecs Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 187/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.187/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Atmecs Technologies Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.301, M J Towers, H-No.8-2-698, Ward -1(1)(1), Road No.12, Bengaluru. Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana – 500 034. Pan : Aamca 0792 J Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. P.V.S.S.Prasad, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Arunkumar, Cit(Tp-2)(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Order Of Assessment Dated 30.3.2021 By The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter Referred To As The Assessing Officer, “Ao” In Short) Passed U/S.143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) In Relation To Ay 2016-2017. 2. The Assessee In Engaged In The Business Of Provision Of Software Development Services (Swd Services), To It’S Associated Enterprises

For Appellant: Shri. P.V.S.S.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Arunkumar, CIT(TP-2)(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)Section 92C

…under utilization of capacity has to be allowed. i) M/s SAP Labs India (P.) Ltd. [2012] 17 taxmann.com 16 (Bang.) ii) M/s Meritor LVS India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2015] 64 taxmann.com 136 (Bangalore - Trib.) iii) M/s. Symantec Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (2011) 46 SOT 48 (Mumbai). 24. The Learned DR relied on the order of the DRP and submitted that the Assessee has not given any calculation of capacity utilization details nor has he requested the TPO for obtaining such details from the comparable companies chosen by the TPO. 25. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the DRP has made the following…

Positive Packaging P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2483/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Positive Packaging Industries Vs Dcit Circle 3(2), Room No. Ltd, 12A-06, B-Wing, 608, Aayakar Bhawan, Parinee Crescenzo, M.K.Road, C-38/39, G-Block, Mumbai-20 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Pan : Aaacp2836Q Appellant Respondednt

Section 201Section 43(6)(c)Section 43A

…t necessary that book value and market value of the capital asset are at par. Our view is further fortified by the decision rendered by the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Intel Asia Electronics Inc. India v. Asstt. DIT [2011] 9 taxmann.com 197/46 SOT 48 (URO) (Bang.). We observed that the DRP while dealing with the objections of the assessee in respect of valuation of capital asst has not properly appreciated the facts and circumstances. The DRP has merely examined one aspect of the transaction relating to pricing of capital 22 ITA 2483/Mum/2015 asset i.e. the price paid by assessee to acquire o…

Dhl Logistics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 9(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1030/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Sooddhl Logistics Private Limited Deputy Commissioner Of 201A,Silver Utopia, Income Tax Circle 9(3)(1), Cardinal Gracias Road, Mumbai Vs. Chakala, Andheri (East) Mumbai 400 059 Pan – Aaacm6824H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan &
Section 143(3)Section 92C(2)Section 92D

…onal transaction. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Actis Advisors (P) Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT (2012) 34 CCH 40 (Del-Trib) and the orders of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Symantec Software Solutions (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2011) 46 SOT 48 (Mum) and Lionbridge Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT (2012) 137 ITD 197 (Mum). Accordingly, in the backdrop of our aforesaid observations we approve the view taken by the TPO/DRP as regards usage of the current year data for benchmarking of the international transactions of the assessee. Resultantly, the aforesaid claim of the assessee is dismis…

M/S Fulcurm Fund Services India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2521/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl.CIT
Section 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 2521/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Fulcrum Fund Services (India) Private Limited, Flat No. 102, Aradhana Apartments, Income Tax Officer, Srinivagilu, 2nd Main Road, Vs. Ward-3(1)(1), S.T. Bed Layout, Koramangala, BANGALORE BANGALORE [PAN: AABCF 1230B] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sharath Rao, CA Respondent by : Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 08-04-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 12-04-2019 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan, Vice…

Fujitsu India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1981/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblefujitsu India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Building No. 9B, Phase- Income-Tax Iii, Dlf Cyber City Circle 9 (2) Gurgaon Aaacf4170D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-2’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Fujitsu India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Building No. 9B, Phase- Income-tax III, DLF Cyber City Circle 9 (2) Gurgaon AAACF4170D New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. K. M. Gupta & Sh. Anubhav Rastogi, Advs Respondent by Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.11.2018 Date of Pronouncement 18.02.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the Assessment Order dated 30/01/2015 passed…

Invteva Products India Automotive Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 830/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri M. P. Lohia, C. AFor Respondent: Shri C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT (DR)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 253(1)(d)

…O, we are of the view that when the arithmetic mean margin is taken of the comparable companies it takes care of the adjustments on account of such differences. Further, the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of Symantec Software Solutions Pvt ltd Vs ACIT (2011) 46 SOT 48 (Mumbai) has in paragraph 16 observed that "……………Even otherwise, until and unless such differences results in deflation or inflation of financial result of the comparables, it is not general Rule of standard adjustment. The assessee has not brought on record how such functional difference and risk has influenced the result of the comparables with q…

Shipnet Software Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 3404/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ड.एस. सु"दर $संह, लेखा सद"य के सम) BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3404/Mds/2016 "नधा*रण वष* /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s.Shipnet Software Solutions India Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., No.2/4, Mount Towers, Income Tax, Corporate Mount Poonamallee Road, Circle-6(1), Manapakka, Chennai-600 089. Chennai-600 034. [PAN: AALCS 8600 A] (अपीलाथ-/Appellant) (./यथ-/Respondent) अपीलाथ- क0 ओर से/ A…

Landis + Gyr Limited, South 24 Parganas vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 37/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Mitra, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 43B

…n upheld in the following mentioned judicial precedents: • Ankit Diamonds ( 2011) 43 SOT 523( Mumbai Trib.) • Avineon India (P) Ltd, TS-308-ITAT-2013(Hyd)-TP • DCIT -vs- M/s Starlite (133 TTJ 425) (Mumbai Trib.) • Symantec Software Solutions (P) Ltd., (2011) 46 SOT 48 (Mumbai Trib) • Tecnimount ICB (P) Ltd., (2011) 11 taxmann.com 49 (Mumbai Trib.) Accordingly, he argued that the ‘transaction by transaction approach’ adopted by the assessee should be considered for benchmarking the international transactions undertaken by the assessee. 5.2.6. In response to this, the ld DR filed a written submission and also mad…

M/S Landis+Gyr Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle -1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1623/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Mitra, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 43B

…n upheld in the following mentioned judicial precedents: • Ankit Diamonds ( 2011) 43 SOT 523( Mumbai Trib.) • Avineon India (P) Ltd, TS-308-ITAT-2013(Hyd)-TP • DCIT -vs- M/s Starlite (133 TTJ 425) (Mumbai Trib.) • Symantec Software Solutions (P) Ltd., (2011) 46 SOT 48 (Mumbai Trib) • Tecnimount ICB (P) Ltd., (2011) 11 taxmann.com 49 (Mumbai Trib.) Accordingly, he argued that the ‘transaction by transaction approach’ adopted by the assessee should be considered for benchmarking the international transactions undertaken by the assessee. 5.2.6. In response to this, the ld DR filed a written submission and also mad…

M/s. Symantec Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (46 SOT 48) — Cited in 16 Judgments | BharatTax