“TNMM”

Transfer PricingSection 92CSection 92C2,208 judgments

The decision most relied on for TNMM is Rampgreen Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (377 ITR 533), cited in 196 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on TNMM

Rampgreen Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

377 ITR 533 · 2015 · High Court

196

citing judgments

Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) service providers are functionally dissimilar to Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) or Information Technology Enabled Services (ITeS) providers and cannot be compared for transfer pricing purposes, even under the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). Further, companies with significantly different business models, such as those with extensive subcontracting, should be excluded as comparables.

Bausch & Lomb Eye Care (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional CIT

381 ITR 227 · 2016 · High Court

127

citing judgments

The existence of an international transaction must be established before its arm's length price can be determined. An alleged 'excessive' AMP expenditure cannot unilaterally expand the scope of an international transaction if its existence is contested.

SAP Labs India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT

44 SOT 156 · 2011 · ITAT

100

citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuation gains or losses are operational in nature and must be included in the computation of the operating margin for both the assessee and comparable companies when determining the Arm's Length Price.

DIT (IT) v. Morgan Stanley & Co Inc.

162 Taxmann 165 · 2007 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The profits of a Permanent Establishment (PE) must be determined on the basis of what an independent enterprise would derive, using the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) for profit attribution. When applying TNMM, the operating profit from an international transaction should be compared with the operating profit margin of comparables.

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. ACIT

68 Taxmann.com 322 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

When benchmarking export transactions, the Associated Enterprise (AE) can be considered the tested party if it possesses the least complex functional analysis. The Assessing Officer's acceptance of a methodology in prior years can also support its use.

Trilogy E-Business Software India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

29 Taxmann.com 310 · 2013 · ITAT

citing judgments

For Transfer Pricing, this case clarifies that foreign exchange gains can be considered operating revenue for ITES providers, acknowledges the impact of offshore versus onsite development pricing on margins even when using TNMM, and affirms the use of a turnover filter for selecting comparable companies.

Capital IQ Information Systems India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

32 Taxmann.com 21 · 2013 · ITAT

citing judgments

A change in depreciation policy impacts an entity's profitability, which is a key factor in assessing its suitability as a comparable company for transfer pricing analysis.

Electronic for Imaging (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

85 Taxmann.com 124 · 2017 · ITAT

citing judgments

Comparability of a company for transfer pricing purposes must be decided afresh by the TPO after considering the facts recorded in prior tribunal decisions. The tribunal may direct exclusion of comparable companies based on such prior decisions.

Judgments citing TNMM

Oocl Logistics (India ). P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7024/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 234DSection 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C(2)Section 92C(3)Section 92D

minimal, therefore, the same were aggregated with main transaction of provision of logistics services. For benchmarking, the assessee used Transactional Net Margin Method (‘TNMM‟) as most appropriate method with Profit Level Indicator (‘PLI‟) of Net Profit to Total Sales. By considering itself as the tested party, the assessee identified following ... services segment) was selected as comparable by the TPO vide order passed under section 92CA(3) of the Act on the basis that under TNMM only broad compatibility of the comparable needs to be seen and therefore, this company is functionally comparable to the assessee. In proceedings before the learned

Eit Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 210/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92D

took the following view:- “64. The next objection of the Assessee is that when the most appropriate method selected for determining ALP is the TNMM there is no reason as to why one should look at price difference in offshore software development and onsite software development. It is no doubt ... true that in TNMM it is only the margins in an uncontrolled transaction that is tested with reference to the controlled transaction but it is not possible to ignore the fact that pricing will have an effect on the margins obtained in a transaction. The argument that if pricing structure

Hp India Sales Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

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

ITA 524/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.524/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/S.Hp India Sales Private The Joint Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known As Income-Tax, Ltu V. Bangalore. Hewlett-Packard India Sales Private Limited), 24 Salarpuria Area, Hosur Main Road, Adugodi Bangalore – 560 030. Pan : Aaacc9862F. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Ajay Vohra, Senior Counsel / Sri. Neeraj Jain, Sri.Lalit Attal & Sri.Karon Dhanuka, Advoicates Respondent By : Sri.Harishchandra Naik, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2022 Date Of Hearing : 27.07.2022 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 03.01.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2012-2013. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In Import Of Computer Peripherals From Its Associated Enterprises (Aes) For Sale In India & Also Rendered Certain Support Services. The Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2012-2013 Was Filed On 29.02.2012, Admitting Total Income Of Rs.544,61,99,276. The Return Was Revised On 25.03.2014

For Appellant: Sri.Ajay Vohra, Senior Counsel / Sri. Neeraj JainFor Respondent: Sri.Harishchandra Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92BSection 92C

making an adjustment without considering and appreciating the fact that aggregation approach followed by the Appellant using Transactional Net Margin Method ("TNMM") would have already factored in all operating expenses (which includes the AMP expenditure) and proving it at arm's length to the satisfaction of the Honorable DRP, learned ... form of AMP function. In doing so, the learned TPO has erroneously disregarded the fact that the Assessee has used Transactional Net Margin Method ("TNMM") to benchmark its transactions which factors in the benchmarking of the AMP expenses. Further the Honorable DRP has upheld the learned TPO's erroneous remarks

Dell India Private Ltd., Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 562/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 92C

Nos.400 & 562/Bang/2015 Page 68 of 73 margin realised by the taxpayer in the international transaction shall alone be computed under the TNMM method. 111. The ld. AR For the FY 2009-10, the Assessee had debited a net foreign exchange loss of Rs. 154,969,000 to its profit

Tekla India P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 15(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 211/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Divesh ChawlaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253Section 40

services availed are inextricably linked to the software distribution activity of the Appellant and cannot be analysed separately and thus Transaction Net Margin method (TNMM) is the most appropriate method to benchmark the aforesaid international transaction. Use of method for benchmarking the international transaction 11. erred in holding ... transactions were inextricably linked, assessee adopted combined transaction approach to benchmark the aforesaid international transactions with its associated enterprises using Transactional Net Margin Method („TNMM‟). As its margin from software distribution activity was 1.53% as against 0.41% earned by the comparable companies, therefore, the software distribution activity of assessee

M/S. Xchanging Solutions Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2570/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

For Respondent: Shri Padam Chand Khincha

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

facts by not giving due considerations to the Assessee's request to consider the internal comparable data for the purpose of application of TNMM in order to determine the ALP of the international transaction entered into by the Assessee with the AEs. 4.15 The learned DRP/AO/TPO have erred ... remanded for fresh consideration. He submitted that the assessee in Ground no. 4.14 has raised the issue of not considering the application of internal TNMM for the purpose of bench marking the international transaction. The Ld.AR submitted that assessee raised this issue before the DRP, and the DRP observed

Jardine Lloyd Thomposn India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1319/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1319/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) Marsh Mclennan Global बिधम/ Ito, Range-15(2)(2) Services India Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. (Formerly Known As Jardine Mumbai-400020. Lloyd Thompson India Pvt. Ltd.) 1001-A, Supreme Business Park, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400076. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj8288K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nishant Thakkar / Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala Revenue By: Ms. Samruddhi Hande (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 28.01.2015 Passed For Ay. 2010-11 By Ao U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144C (13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) In Pursuance To The Directions Given By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp).

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar / Ms. JasminFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande (Sr. AR)

Section 143(3)Section 92C(3)

international transaction involving ‘provision of administrative support and back office support services’ was benchmarked using the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the Most Appropriate Method (‘MAM’) to determine the Arm’s Length Price (‘ALP’). The assessee had taken Operating Profit to Total Cost (‘OP/TC’) ratio as the Profit Level ... Indicator (‘PLI’) under TNMM which worked out to 14.36% on total cost. The assessee had identified eleven (11) comparables whose PLI was computed at 11.39%. It was thus claimed that the aforesaid international transaction was at arm’s length. The AO had referred the international transactions undertaken by the assessee

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT(It) 1(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5129/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

based on the corresponding back to back guarantee provided by the overseas associated enterprises (AE's)). Ground 2: Rejecting the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) used by the Appellant and adopting External Comparable Uncontrolled Price (COP) method as the most appropriate method That on the facts and in the circumstances ... Indian beneficiaries (based on the back to back guarantee provided by the overseas AEs) on account of the following: a) In rejecting the TNMM used by the Appellant without appreciating that the Appellant provides administrative support services, by issuing local guarantees based on the instructions and counter guarantee received from

M/S. Onmobile Global Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 5(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2560/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 244ASection 32

taking the AEs as the tested party, since the AEs were the least complex entities to the transaction. The assessee adopted the TNMM as the most appropriate method [MAM] and the profit level indicator [PLI] as Operating Profit/Total Cost [OP/TC]. With respect to rendering of SWD services to Voxmobili ... length price of the international transactions representing software development services provided to the associated enterprises (AE) is determined by applying transactional net margin method (TNMM), stating to be the most appropriate method in the facts and circumstances of the case. The operating profit to total cost ratio is taken

M/S Onmobile Global Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 139/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 244ASection 32

Nuance Transcription Services India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 173/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.173/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/S.Nuance Transcription The Assistant Commissioner Services India Private Limited Of Income-Tax, Circle 5(1)(1) V. Bangalore. First Floor, Block B, Salarpuria Aura, Khata No.434/170 Marathahalli-Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Kaverappa Layout Bangalore – 560 103. Pan : Aaacf3465F. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Vishal Kalra, Ca Respondent By : Sri.Harishchandra Naik, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2022 Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2022 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 22.11.2016 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2012-2013. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is Engaged In Providing Information Technology Enabled Services (Ites) To Focus Enterprises Limited, Usa, Which Is An Associate Enterprise (Ae) Of The Assessee. For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, The Return Of Income Was Filed Declaring Total Income Of Rs.23,99,94,900. The Assessment Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notice U/S 2 It(Tp)A No.173/Bang/2017. M/S.Nuance Transcription Services India Private Limited. 143(2) Of The I.T.Act Dated 14.08.2013 Was Served. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed That The Assessee Had Entered Into International Transactions With Its Ae. Accordingly, The Case Was Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo) To Determine The Arm’S Length Price (Alp) Of The International Transaction Undertaken By The Assessee With Its Ae’S. The Tpo Vide Order Dated 28.01.2016, Passed U/S 92Ca Of The I.T.Act, Proposed The Following Tp Adjustments:-

For Appellant: Sri.Vishal Kalra, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Harishchandra Naik, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 92C

that of the computation of ALP and the adjustment made by the TPO are as under:- Particulars As per assessee As per TPO Methodology TNMM Sales (refer A/R at 79,35,97,751 79,35,97,751 296 of PB, TP study at pg.257

Mersen India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 381/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 381/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Mersen India Pvt. The Joint Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 5, Bommasandra Income Tax (Osd), Industrial Area, Circle – 4 (1)(2), Bangalore – 560 099. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aaace3191K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Ramya Nayak, Ca : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Revenue By Cit Dr-1 Date Of Hearing : 04-08-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 08-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Assessment Order Dated 22/03/2022 By The National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Hereinafter Are Without Prejudice To One Another. Transfer Pricing 1. The Transfer Pricing Officer ("Tpo"), The Assessing Officer ("Ao") & The Dispute Resolution Panel, Bangalore ("Drp") Have Grossly Erred In Law & Facts Of The Case In Determining The Arm'S Length Price ("Alp") Of The Human Resource Services As Nil. 2. The Learned Tpo/ Ao/Drp Has Erred In Not Considered The Fact That The Human Resource Services Is As Per The Arm'S Length Price Adopting The Transaction Net Margin Method (" Tnmm")

For Appellant: Smt. Ramya Nayak, CA

considered the fact that the Human Resource services is as per the arm's length price adopting the transaction net margin method (" TNMM") Page 2 of 6 IT(TP)A No. 381/Bang/2022 3. The finding of the learned TPO/ AO/ DRP that the Assessee has failed to substantiate receipt

Yokogawa India Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore

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

ITA 588/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R

Section 234BSection 40A(2)

erred in confirming the action of the 5. AO and TPO in: Not appreciating that the Appellant had adopted the (i) TNMM at the segment level, in which process, the management fees, GSMF and after sales service fees were considered as closely linked transaction and IT(TP)A No.588/Bang/2020 Page ... Ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO and TPO in not appreciating that the appellant had adopted the TNMM at the segment level, in which process, the management fees, GSMF and after sales service fees were considered as closely linked transaction and hence were subsumed into

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

between high end software activity and low-end activity, so long as it falls within the purview of software development services. Besides, under the TNMM, such differences are tolerable and there is no requirement that the services / activities performed are identical. It is enough that the services are similar

ACIT Circle 2(1) (1), Mumbai vs. Eclerx Services Limited (Sucessor of M/S. Agilyst Consulting Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1614/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, M/S. Eclerx Services Ltd. Circle 2(1)(1), (Successor Of M/S. Agilyst Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Consulting Pvt. Ltd.), Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Sonawala Building, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 009 Pan: Aaace79321 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arijit Chakravarty, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Mishra, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 251Section 254

provision of ITES to the tune of Rs.77,65,29,181/-. Assessee in order to benchmark its international transactions applied Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) with OP/OC as profit level indicator. Ld. TPO accepted the TNMM with OP/OC as profit level indicator as the most appropriate method to benchmark ... Revenue challenging the impugned inclusion of MPS Ltd. as comparable by Ld. CIT(A) contended that MPS Ltd. is a valid comparable because under TNMM broad comparability is required and that broadly speaking MPS Ltd. is a BPO Company and as such functionally similar vis-à-vis assessee& relied upon

Ups Express P Ltd. (Formerly Known As Ups Jetair Express P. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -11(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly

ITA 1221/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan (CIT-DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 44ASection 92C

returned income. This DRP is also in agreement with the view taken by the DRP for the A.Y. 2011-12 that the entity level TNMM, by itself, would not satisfy the statutory requirement of testing the arm's length nature of the international transaction of the payment of technical knowhow ... Assessee’s export pick up services for which it is already being compensated and the incidental cost, if any are considered under TNMM analysis, we find that it has not been shown before us how the recovery of the expenses are closely linked with various other transactions and cannot

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Komli Wedia India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.3889/Mum/2017 for A

ITA 3890/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Samruddhi D Hande, DR

incurring huge employee cost assessee is providing value added services and further it has also incurred advertisement, business development expenditures. Therefore, he adopted TNMM as the most appropriate method. The learned Transfer Pricing Officer proposed an adjustment of Rs. 77,18,471/-. Certain other disallowance were also made

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Komli Wedia India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.3889/Mum/2017 for A

ITA 3889/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Samruddhi D Hande, DR

Addl CIT RG 10(2), Mumbai vs. Geometric Softwar Solutions Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground no

ITA 6219/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm M/S Geometric Software The Acit Solutions Company Ltd. Ward 10(2), [ Now Merged With Hcl Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Technologies Limited ] Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, 806, Sidharth, 96 Nehru Mumbai-400 020 Place, New Delhi 19 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aabcg 0066 A Co No. 157/Mum/2011 (Arising In Ita No.6219/Mum/2010 For A.Y. 2005–06) M/S Geometric Software Solutions Company Ltd. The Acit (Now Gemetric Ltd.) [ Now Ward 10(2), Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Merged With Hcl Vs. Technologies Limited] Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 806, Sidharth, 96 Nehru Place, New Delhi 19 (Respondent) (Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri Porus F. Kaka & Shri Manish Kanth, Ars‟ Revenue By : Shri Sumit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022

For Appellant: Shri Porus F. Kaka &For Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR

Section 10ASection 14A

services of ₹6,83,41,998/-. These transactions were benchmarked by the assessee by adopting the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the most appropriate method taking net margin as profit level indicator. Assessee selected 28 comparables, whose margin was 9.76% where as assessee‟s margin was 20.27% and therefore

Geometric Software Solutins Co. Ltd ( Now Gemetric Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no

ITA 5975/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Porus F. Kaka &For Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR

Section 10ASection 14A