Pr. CIT v. Aptara Technology (P.) Ltd.

92 Taxmann.com 240High Court2018#5096 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Aptara Technology (P.) Ltd. authority for?

A comparable company is not suitable if it has a significantly different business model, such as substantially higher outsourcing expenses as a percentage of operating costs, indicating a deviation from the tested party's operations.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Aptara Technology · outsourcing expenses · business model · comparable company · transfer pricing · section 92d · section 92ca(1) · related party transaction · arms length price

Sections most often in play

Section 10(B)(3)Section 10B(1)(e)Section 10B(3)

Issues it is cited on

contemporaneous datacaptive service providersection 92dmultiple year datarelated party transactiontested partycomparable companiesfar analysisworking capital adjustmentarms length pricebenchmarking analysissection 92ca(1)

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Aptara Technology (P.) Ltd.

Agilyst Consulting Pvt. Ltd.(Merged With Eclerx Services Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir.2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3999/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Arijit Chakravarty a/wFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh K. Das

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A no.3999/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) Agilyst Consulting Pvt. Ltd. (Merged with eClerx Services Ltd.) Sonawala Building, 29, Bank Street ……………. Appellant Fort, Mumbai 400 023 PAN – AAHCA0105A v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(1)(2), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Arijit Chakravarty a/w Shri Abhishek Tilak Revenue by : Shri Rignesh K. Das Date of Hearing – 17.07.2019 Date of Order – 14.10.2019 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.…

Gts E-Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(1)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1231/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1231/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Gts E-Services Private Ltd. Income Tax Officer-15(1)(4) 103, A-Wing Kensinton Room No.15B, Ground Floor बनाम/ Hiranandani Business Park Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Hiranandani Builder Sez Mumbai-400 020. Powai, Mumbai-400 076. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccg-8662-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Nilesh Patel- Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Agarwal – Addl. Cit-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 26/06/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Patel- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Agarwal – Addl. CIT-Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…ces, the same would not make these entities comparable to assessee as held by Mumbai Tribunal (Special Bench) in Maersk Global Centers (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s ACIT [2014 43 Taxmann.com 100], Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Aptara Technology Pvt. Ltd. [2018 92 Taxmann.com 240] & Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Rampgreen Solutions Pvt. Ltd. V/s CIT [2015 60 Taxmann.com 355]. 4.2 In the above background, Ld. AR argued for exclusion of 4 entities namely (i) Accentia Technologies Ltd. (ii) Universal Print Systems Ltd. (iii) BNR Udyog Ltd. (iv) Excel Infoways Ltd. by submitting that these entities were functionally not…

M/S. Vaildor Capital India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1961/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia.Y.: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. S.D. Kapila, Adv. & Sh. R.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saweta Nakra Datta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I.2”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y.: 2010-11 VAILDOR CAPITAL INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ITO, WARD 26(1), 8599, EAST PARK ROAD, C.R. BUILDING, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (PAN: AABCH8403J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. S.D. Kapila, Adv. & Sh. R.R. Maurya, Adv. Department by : Ms. Saweta Nakra Datta, Sr. DR. O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM 01 This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”)…