| |
| The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 1997 (Bang-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 92C
In case of Acceptel Technologies Ltd. segmental information containing break-up of its export sales and employee costs, was not available and it was not possible to ascertain if it passed export earnings and/or employee costs filters, and this company was predominantly doing on-site development of software and, therefore, could not be compared with a company like assessee which developed software offshore.
|
Transfer pricing - Determination of ALP - Selection of comparables - No segmental details and different business model
Assessee rendered software development services to its AE abroad. TPO considered Acropatel Technologies Ltd. as comparable to assessee's case. Held: In case of Acceptel Technologies Ltd. segmental information containing break-up of its export sales and employee costs, was not available and it was not possible to ascertain if it passed export earnings and/or employee costs filters, and this company was pre-dominantly doing on-site development of software and, therefore, could not be compared with a company like assessee which developed software offshore.
Followed:Dy. CIT v. CGI Information Systems & Management Consultation (P) Ltd. (2018) 93 Taxmann.com 9 : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 2154 (Bang-Trib), Electronics for Imaging India (P) Ltd., v. Dy. CIT for assessment year 2011-12 (2017) 85 Taxmann.com 124 : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 4187 (Bang-Trib) and Dy. CIT v. Herbalife International India (P) Ltd. (2019) 111 Taxmann.com 244.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2011-12
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 92C
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|