BA Continuum India Private Limited (Formerly known as BA Continuum Solutions Private Limited (BACS'), Hyderabad V. DCIT, Circle 1(3)4, Hyderabad

ITA 221/HYD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5910 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-02-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P CHANDRA SEKHAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SAMPATH RAGHUNATHAN
• Keywords: Depreciation; Transfer pricing; International transaction; Working capital adjustments
• Section: 143(3); 92D

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. ASST. YEAR APPELLANT RESPONDENT 221/HYD/14 2007 - 08 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BA CONTINUUM SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED (BACS) HYDERABAD [PAN: AACCC3062D] DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD 301/HYD/14 2007 - 08 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BA CONTINUUM SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED (BACS) HYDERABAD [PAN: AACCC3062D] FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI SAMPATH RAGHUNATHAN, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI P. CHANDRA SEKHAR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 03-11-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16-12-2016 O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. : THESE ARE CROSS-APPEALS BY ASSESSEE AND REVENUE AG AINST THE ORDER(S) OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -V, HYDERABAD, DATED 31-10-2013. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACT ARE, ASSESSEE-COMPANY, BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ['BACI'] (FORMERLY KN OWN AS CFC) (PAN-AACCC3062D) HAS MERGED WITH THE BA CONTINUUM SOL UTIONS I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 2 -: PRIVATE LIMITED [BACS] (PAN -AACCC2310C) W.E.F. 01 A PRIL 2008. ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROV IDING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY [IT] AND IT ENABLED SERVICES [ITES] TO ITS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISES ('AE'). 3. DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO AY.2007-08, ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAD THE FOLLOWING INTERNATIONAL TRANSA CTIONS: SR. NO. DESCRIPTION OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTION AMOUNT (RS) MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD 1. PROVISION OF SOFTWARE SERVICES 6,98,000 TNMM 2. PROVISION FOR ITES 13,99,000 TNMM 3. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES 1,37,100 TNMM 4. ASSESSEE MAINTAINED THE RELEVANT TRANSFER PRICING [TP] DOCUMENTATION AS REQUIRED U/S 92D OF THE INCOME TAX A CT [ACT] R/W RULE 10D OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. IN THE TP DOCUMENTATION MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE-COMPANY, TRANSACT IONAL NET MARGIN METHOD [TNMM] WAS SELECTED AS THE MOST APPRO PRIATE METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE ARM'S LENGTH PRICE [ALP] F OR ALL THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. ASSESSEE-COMPANY SELECTED TH E MARK- UP ON OPERATING COST (I.E. OP/OC) AS THE APPROPRIATE PR OFIT LEVEL INDICATOR [PLI] IN APPLYING THE TNMM. AS A PART OF TH E TP DOCUMENTATION, ASSESSEE-COMPANY UNDERTOOK BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS TO JUSTIFY THE ARM'S LENGTH NATURE OF ALL THE I NTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. 5. ASSESSEE-COMPANY APPLIED VARIOUS QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE FILTERS TO ARRIVE AT A SET OF 8 COMPARABLE CO MPANIES WITH THE ARITHMETIC MEAN OF COMPARABLE COMPANIES AT 18.62% A S I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 3 -: AGAINST 23.61% MARGIN OF THE COMPANY. SINCE, ASSESSEE - COMPANY'S MARGIN WAS MORE THAN THE ARITHMETIC MEAN OF TH E COMPARABLES, THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS OF ASSESSEE- COMPANY WERE CONCLUDED TO BE AT ARM'S LENGTH. 6. ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS SERVED WITH A NOTICE U/S 14 3(2) OF THE ACT BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-9(1), MUMBAI FOR INITIATING REGULAR ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. SINCE, ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAD INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS DURING THE FY. 2006-07, THE AO AT MUMBAI REFERRED THE INTERNATIONAL TR ANSACTIONS REPORTED BY ASSESSEE-COMPANY VIDE ITS FORM 3CEB TO THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRANSFER PRIC ING-1(2), MUMBAI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS TPO) U/S. 92CA OF THE ACT FOR VERIFICATION OF ARM'S LENGTH NATURE OF THE INTERNATIONA L TRANSACTIONS. 7. IN THE TP PROCEEDINGS U/S. 92CA OF THE ACT TPO VI DE THE SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE DATED 09 SEPTEMBER 2009 HAS REJECT ED THE BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS OF ASSESSEE-COMPANY, CONDUCTE D A FRESH BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS USING VARIOUS FILTERS, SELECTE D 25 COMPARABLE COMPANIES FOR BENCHMARKING THE INTERNATIONA L TRANSACTIONS OF ASSESSEE-COMPANY AND PROPOSED TO COMPA RE THE SAME WITH ASSESSEE-COMPANY. TPO DETERMINED THE ARM'S LENGTH MARGIN AT 30.67% FOR THE 25 COMPANIES AND PROPOSED TO MAKE A TP ADJUSTMENT AMOUNTING TO RS. 7,99,23,060/-. TPO HAS DEN IED GRANTING WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT TO THE ASSESSEE AS R EQUESTED. I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 4 -: 8. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE 25 COMPANIES SELECTED BY TPO AS PER THE TPO'S ORDER: SR. NO. COMPANIES SELECTED BY TPO OP/O C (%) 1 MOLD - TEK TECHNOLOGIES LTD. (SEG) 113.49 2 VISHAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES LTD. 51.19 3 ECLERX SERVICES LIMITED 89.33 4 MAPLE ESOLUTIONS LTD. 34.05 5 ACCENTIA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED 38.26 6 ISERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD. 50.27 7 H C L COMNET SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD. (SEG) 44.99 8 ADITYA BIRLA MINACS WORLDWIDE LTD 11.98 9 ALLSEC TECHNOLOGIES LTD 27.31 10 APEX KNOWLEDGE SOLUTIONS PVT LTD 12.83 11 APPO LL O HEALTH STREET LTD - 13.55 12 ASIT C MEHTA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD 24.21 13 BODHTREE CONSULTING L IMITED (SEG) 29.58 14 CALIBER POINT BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LTD 21.26 15 COSMIC GLOBAL LTD 12.40 16 DATAMATICS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD 5.07 17 FLEXTRONICS SOFTWARE SYSTEMS LIMITED (SEG) 14.54 18 GENESYS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION LTD. 13.35 19 I C R A TECHN O ANALYTICS LTD. (SEG) 12.24 20 INFORMED TECHNOLOGIES INDIA LTD. 35.56 21 LNFOSYS B P O LTD. 27.89 22 R SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL LTD. (SEG) 20.18 23 SPANCO LTD. (SEG) 25.81 24 TRITON CORP LTD. 34.93 25 WIPRO LTD. (SEG) 29.70 AVERAGE MARGIN 30.67 9. SUBSEQUENTLY, ON ACCOUNT OF MERGER OF THE COMPANY WITH ANOTHER COMPANY THE FILES GOT TRANSFERRED FROM TH E AO AT MUMBAI TO THE JURISDICTIONAL AO OF THE ASSESSEE AT HY DERABAD I.E. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3), HYD ERABAD (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'AO'). 10. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, A O ASKED THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY TO PROVIDE VARIOUS INFORMA TION/ I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 5 -: DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE REGULARLY PROVIDED BY ASSESSEE TO THE AO. SUBSEQUENTLY, AO COMPLETED ASSESSMENT FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND PASSED DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) R/W SECTION 144C(1) OF ACT ON 16 DECEMBER 2010, WHERE IN HE RECOMPUTED THE AMOUNT OF DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE- COMPANY U/S 10A OF THE ACT AND ADDED TP ADJUSTMENT AS P ROPOSED BY THE TPO. 11. ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY FILED A LETTER DATED 04 JA NUARY 2011 BEFORE AO REQUESTING HIM TO PASS THE FINAL ASSES SMENT ORDER AS ASSESSEE WISHED TO FILE AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A ) INSTEAD OF FILING AN APPEAL BEFORE THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL [ DRP]. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE LETTER FILED BY ASSESSEE, AO PASSED FINA L ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) R/W SECTION 144C(4) OF THE ACT ON 25 FEBRUARY 2011. 12. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSED OF AO/TPO, ASSESS EE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON 28 MARC H 2011 WITH RESPECT TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED TP ADJUSTMENT AND DEDUCTIO N U/S 10A OF THE ACT. LD. CIT(A) PASSED AN ORDER U/S 250 O F THE ACT ON 31 OCTOBER 2013. THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED PARTIAL RELIEF FOR THE GROUNDS RAISED BY ASSESSEE BARRING THE GROUND ON TP ADJUSTME NT WHICH WAS UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT(A). WITH REGARD TO ASSESSEE'S GR OUND ON ERRONEOUS COMPUTATION OF MARGINS OF CERTAIN COMPANIES , THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE CONCLUSIONS OF TPO. 13. AGGRIEVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ORDER, ASSESSEE FIL ED PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THIS FORUM. I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 6 -: 14. ASSESSEE RAISED EIGHT GROUNDS AND THE FOLLOWING FOUR GROUNDS ARE THE PRINCIPAL GROUNDS PERTAINING TO TP ADJ USTMENT: GROUND NO. 4: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED IN COMPUTING THE OPERATING MARGIN/OP ERATING COST (I.E. PLI) OF FIVE COMPARABLE COMPANIES OUT OF THE TWENTY FIVE COMPARABLE COMPANIES CONSIDERED BY TPO AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO. GROUND NO. 5: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/ CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO IN SELECTING HIGH PROFIT MARGIN C OMPANIES AND HIGH TURNOVER COMPANIES AS COMPARABLE TO THE COMPANY. GROUND NO. 6: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/ CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO IN SELECTING THE COMPARABLE COMPA NIES WHICH ARE FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT AND COMPANIES WHOSE FINANCIA LS ARE NOT RELIABLE. GROUND NO. 7: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/ CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT OF 2.27% AND NOT PROVIDING DOWNWARD ADJUSTMENT TO THE MARK-UP OF COMPARABLE COMPANIES IN-SPITE OF BEING QUANTIFIED B Y THE APPELLANT. 15. REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL HAS RAISED ONLY ONE GROUN D: GROUND NO. 2: THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTIN G THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REDUCE THE LEASE LINE CHARGES FROM TOTAL TURNOVE R AS WELL AS EXPORT TURNOVER. 16. ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AN ADDITIONAL GROUND STATING THAT THE ORDER PASSED ON ASSESSEE IS NOT VALID AS THE AO H AS ERRED IN CARRYING ON THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS A NON-EXISTING ENTITY ON THE DATE O F PASSING OF SUCH ORDERS. THE REASONS FOR RAISING THE ADDITIONAL GROUND ARE STATED AS UNDER: I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 7 -: BACI (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CFC) WAS INCORPORATED ON 10 FEBRUARY 2004 WITH ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MUMBAI. THE COMPANY W AS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ('IT') AND IT ENABLED SERVICES CITES') TO ITS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISES. THE COMPANY GOT MERGED WITH THE APPELLANT WITH EF FECT FROM 01 APRIL 2008 VIDE THE HON'BLE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT ORD ER DATED 14 DECEMBER 2009 AND THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT ORD ER DATED 18 DECEMBER 2009. POST RECEIPT OF MERGER ORDERS, THE A PPELLANT FILED LETTER WITH THE JURISDICTIONAL INCOME TAX OFFICER OF THE C OMPANY AS WELL AS THE JURISDICTIONAL INCOME TAX OFFICER OF THE APPELLANT ON 09 APRIL 2010 AND 13 APRIL 2010 RESPECTIVELY (ENCLOSED ALONG WITH APPEAL DOCUMENTS), INTIMATING ABOUT THE MERGER OF THE COMPANY WITH THE APPELLANT AND THEREBY REQUESTING FOR TRANSFER OF FILES OF THE COM PANY FROM MUMBAI INCOME TAX JURISDICTION TO HYDERABAD INCOME TAX JUR ISDICTION. PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED COPY OF THE SAID LETTERS VIDE ANNEXURE 1 A ND 2 RESPECTIVELY. THEREAFTER, THE APPELLANT GOT ITS NAME CHANGED TO BACI WITH EFFECT FROM 15 SEPTEMBER 2010 (ENCLOSED ALONG WITH APPEAL DOCUM ENTS). THE COMPANY WAS SERVED WITH A NOTICE U/S 143(2) O F THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ('ACT') BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX, CIRCLE - 9(1), MUMBAI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'LD. MUMBAI AO') FOR INITIATING REGULAR ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ('FY' ) 2006-07. SINCE, THE COMPANY HAD INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS DURING THE FY 2006- 07, THE LD. MUMBAI AO REFERRED THE INTERNATIONAL TR ANSACTIONS REPORTED BY THE COMPANY IN ITS FORM 3CEB TO THE ADDITIONAL COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRANSFER PRICING-1(2), MUMBAI (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO AS 'LD.TPO') U/S 92CA OF THE ACT FOR VERIFICATION OF ARM'S NATURE OF THE SAID INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. TPO PROPOSED TO 'MAKE A TRANSFER PRICING ('TP') A DJUSTMENT OF RS. 7,99,23,060 VIDE THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 92CA(3) OF THE ACT DATED 28 OCTOBER 2010 PASSED IN THE NAME OF THE COMPANY, WHI CH WAS NOT IN EXISTENCE AS ON THE DATE OF ORDER. SUBSEQUENTLY, ON ACCOUNT OF MERGER OF THE COMPANY WITH THE APPELLANT, THE FILES OF THE COMPANY GOT TRANSFERRED FROM THE L D. MUMBAI AO TO THE JURISDICTIONAL INCOME TAX OFFICER OF THE APPELLANT AT HYDERABAD I.E. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3), HYDERABAD ('LD. AO'). DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, AO A SKED THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE VARIOUS INFORMATION/DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE RE GULARLY FILED BY THE APPELLANT WITH AO. I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 8 -: AO COMPLETED ASSESSMENT FOR THE RELEVANT AY AND P ASSED DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) R/W SECTION 144C(1) OF ACT ON 16 DECEMBER 2010, WHEREIN AO RECOMPUTED THE AMOUNT OF DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE COMPANY U/S 10A OF THE ACT AND ADDED TP ADJUSTMENT AS PROPOSED BY TPO. THE SAID DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED IN THE NAME OF THE COMPANY WHICH WAS NOT IN EXISTENCE AS ON THAT DATE. 17. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, HOWEVER, LD. COUNSEL SUBM ITTED THAT THEY ARE NOT PRESSING THE ABOVE ADDITIONAL GROUND. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITIONAL GROUND IS TREATED AS WITHDRAWN AND DISMISSED. ITA NO. 221/HYD/2014: 18. AS BRIEFLY STATED ABOVE, ASSESSEE IS CONTESTING MA INLY ON FOUR GROUNDS I.E., FROM 4 TO 7. THE ADJUDICATION OF THE SAID GROUNDS IS AS UNDER: 19. COMPUTATION OF MARGINS: GROUND NO. 4: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED IN COMPUTING THE OPERATING MARGIN /OPERATING COST (I.E. PLI) OF FIVE COMPARABLE COMPANIES OUT OF THE TWENTY FIVE COMPARABLE COMPANIES CONSIDERED BY TPO AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURT HER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CASE OF THE FOLLOWING COMPAR ABLE COMPANIES, THE MARGIN COMPUTED BY TPO SUFFERS FROM AR ITHMETICAL AND OTHER ERRORS. I. ACCENTIA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ('ACCENTIA') : ACCENTIA OPERATES IN THREE SEGMENTS AND TPO HAS CONSI DERED 'MEDICAL TRANSCRIPTION' SERVICES SEGMENT FOR THE PURPO SE OF MARGIN COMPUTATION. TPO DID NOT REDUCE THE PROPORTIONAL DEPREC IATION FROM THE SEGMENTAL REVENUE, WHILE ARRIVING AT THE OPER ATING PROFITS I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 9 -: OF THE ACCENTIA, THEREBY ENHANCING THE NET COST PLUS MARG IN OF ACCENTIA TO 38.26% INSTEAD OF 30.61% (BEFORE WORKING C APITAL ADJUSTMENT). THIS IS CONTRADICTORY TO TPO'S OWN APPROACH WHEREIN, HE HAS CONSIDERED DEPRECIATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF COM PUTING OPERATING COST AND THEREBY ARRIVING AT NET COST PLUS MARG INS. II. FLEXTRONICS SOFTWARE SYSTEMS LIMITED ('FLEXTRON ICS') : TPO AT THE TIME OF COMPUTING THE MARGIN OF FLEXTRONICS CONSIDERED THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF FY 2005-06, RESUL TING IN NET COST PLUS MARGIN OF 14.54% INSTEAD OF ACTUAL MARGIN O F 8.62% (BEFORE WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT) FOR FY2006-07. TPO HAS USED CURRENT YEAR DATA FOR ALL THE COMPANIES SELECTED AS CO MPARABLES, HOWEVER FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING MARGIN OF FLEXTRO NICS, TPO HAS CONSIDERED THE WRONG FY. THEREFORE, USE OF PREVI OUS YEAR'S DATA FOR COMPUTATION OF MARGINS OF FLEXTRONICS IS DEVIATION FROM TPO'S OWN STAND. III. ISERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ('ISERVICES') : THE MARGIN COMPUTED BY TPO AT 50.27% IS ERRONEOUS VI S- A- VIS THE CORRECT MARGIN COMPUTATION OF 49.47% (BEFORE W ORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT). TPO HAS CONSIDERED 'FOREIGN EXCHA NGE FLUCTUATIONS' AS NON-OPERATING IN NATURE AND EXCLUDED THE SAME FROM THE TOTAL COST OF ISERVICES FOR DETERMINING THE OP ERATING COST. HOWEVER, WHILE DOING SO, TPO HAS ERRONEOUSLY EXCLUD ED THE SAME TWICE FROM THE TOTAL COST OF ISERVICES RESULTING IN HIGH ER MARGIN. VI. I C R A TECHNO ANALYTICS LIMITED ('ICRA') : I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 10 -: THE MARGIN COMPUTED BY TPO AT 12.24% IS ERRONEOUS VIS -A- VIS THE CORRECT MARGIN COMPUTATION OF 10.94% (BEFORE W ORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT). ASSESSEE HAS MADE SUBMISSION IN R ELATION TO THIS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) D ID NOT CONSIDER THE SAME. 19.1. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IF THE ABOVE MENTIONED REVIS ED MARGIN OF THE COMPARABLE COMPANIES IS CONSIDERED, THE ARM'S LENGTH MARGIN OF THE COMPARABLES COMPANIES MENTIONED IN THE TP ORDER WILL COME DOWN TO 30.05% FROM 30.67% AND THER EBY THE MARGIN OF THE COMPANY WILL FALL IN THE +/- 5% RANGE A S PER PROVISO TO SECTION 92C(2) OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT WA S THE PRAYER TO CONSIDER THE CORRECT MARGIN COMPUTATION OF VARIOUS CO MPARABLE COMPANIES AND DELETE THE TP ADJUSTMENT MADE BY TPO/ LD .AO. 20. LD. DR HOWEVER, SUBMITTED THAT TPO HAS CORRECTLY CALCULATED THE MARGINS. HOWEVER, HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF IT IS RESTORED TO THE AO FOR VERIFICATION. 21. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE HAS TO BE EXAMINED BY THE AO AFTER G IVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THIS GROUND IS R ESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO/TPO TO EXAMINE WHETHER ASSESSEES ABOVE C ONTENTIONS ARE CORRECT AND IF SO, TO MODIFY THE MARGINS COMPUTED. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THIS GROUND IS CONSIDERED ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. 22. SELECTION OF COMPARABLE COMPANIES: GROUND NOS. 5 & 6 PERTAIN TO THE ISSUE OF COMPARABILITY OF CERTAIN COMP ANIES. I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 11 -: GROUND NO. 5: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/ CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO IN SELECTING HIGH PROFIT MARGIN C OMPANIES AND HIGH TURNOVER COMPANIES AS COMPARABLE TO THE COMPANY. GROUND NO. 6: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/ CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO IN SELECTING THE COMPARABLE COMPA NIES WHICH ARE FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT AND COMPANIES WHOSE FINANCIA LS ARE NOT RELIABLE. 22.1. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT TPO ERRED IN SELECTING THE FOLLOWING COMPANIES AS COMPARABLES WHICH ARE FUNCTI ONALLY NOT COMPARABLE TO THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY, HAVING HIGH PROF IT MARGIN ETC. IT WAS THE CONTENTION THAT THE FOLLOWING COMPARABL E COMPANIES SHOULD BE REJECTED / EXCLUDED FROM THE FINAL LIST OF COMPARABLES SELECTED BY TPO FOR THE REASONS STATED: I. MOLD TEK TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ('MOLD TEK'); II. VISHAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ('VISHA L'); III. ECLERX SERVICES LIMITED ('ECLERX'); IV. MAPLE ESOLUTIONS LIMITED ('MAPLE'); I. MOLD TEK TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ('MOLD TEK'): FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT: MOLDTEK SHOULD BE REJECTED AS COMPARABLE AS IT IS ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ENGINEERIN G DESIGN SERVICES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING BY USING DESIG N TOOLS LIKE CADI CAM, STADD PRO BY EMPLOYING HIGHLY SKILLED SOFT WARE ENGINEERS FOR THE PURPOSE. THESE SERVICES ARE IN NA TURE OF KPO AND SHARP CONTRAST TO THE NATURE OF WORK UNDERTAKEN BY ASSES SEE- COMPANY. TPO DID NOT AGREE TO THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE THAT MOLDTEK FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT AND INVOLVED IN HIGH E ND KPO I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 12 -: SERVICES. LD. CIT(A) RELIED ON TPO'S ORDER AND REJE CTED THE CONTENTIONS OF ASSESSEE. 22.2. IN THIS REGARD, ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE ON TH E FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS FOR REJECTION OF MOLDTEK AS A COMP ARABLE COMPANY: MAERSK GLOBAL CENTRES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED VS. ACI T, MUMBAI [I.T.A. NO.7466/MUM/2012/AY 2008-09] ; SYMPHONY MARKETING SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD. - IT(TP)A NO. 1316/BANG/2012] ; CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., VS. DC IT HYDERABAD [ITA NO.1961/HYD/2011] ; AVINEON INDIA (P.) LTD VS. DCIT [41 TAXMANN.COM 334 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] ; C3I SUPPORT SERVICES (P.) LTD VS. ACIT [46 TAXMANN.CO M 453 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] II. VISHAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ('VISHA L') : FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT: VISHAL SUBCONTRACTS MAJORITY O F ITS ITES WORK TO THIRD PARTY VENDORS AND HAS MADE SIGNIFICANT PAYMENTS TO THESE VENDORS, TO THE EXTENT OF 85.76% OF THE TOTAL EXPEND ITURE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. VISHAL HAS ALSO COMMENCED THE NEW LINE OF BUSINESS OF PRINTING ON DEMAND (POD) , WHEREIN IT PRINTS UPON CLIENT REQUEST. THUS, IT IS INTO THE BUSINE SS OF E- PUBLISHING. VISHAL WAS HOLDING SUBSTANTIAL INVENTORIES IN THE NEW LINE OF POD BUSINESS. VISHAL'S EMPLOYEE COST TO THE TO TAL OPERATING COST IS ONLY 3.47% DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATIO N VIS-IT-VIS ASSESSEE'S 47%. TPO DID NOT AGREE TO THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 13 -: AND REJECTED THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE. LD. CTT(A) RELIED ON TPO'S ORDER AND REJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF ASSESSEE. IN THIS REGARD, ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING J UDICIAL PRECEDENTS FOR REJECTION OF VISHAL AS A COMPARABLE CO MPANY: CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS INDIA (P.) LTD VS. DCIT [32 TAXMANN.COM 21 (2013) (HYD ITAT)] ; AVINEON INDIA (P.) LTD VS. DCIT [41 TAXMANN.COM 33 4 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] ; C3I SUPPORT SERVICES (P.) LTD VS. ACIT [46 TAXMANN.CO M 453 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] ; BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [ITA NO. 1154/HYD/2011 (HYD ITAT)] III. ECLERX SERVICES LIMITED ('ECLERX') : FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT: ECLERX SHOULD BE REJECTED AS COMPARABLE AS IT IS ENGAGED IN PROVIDING HIGH END SERVICES IN T HE NATURE OF KPO ACTIVITIES LIKE DATA ANALYTICS, AND CUSTOMIZED PROCESS S OLUTIONS. THESE INCLUDE DATA ANALYTICS, OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, AUDITS AND RECONCILIATION, METRICS MANAGEMENT AND REPORTING SERV ICES. TPO DID NOT AGREE TO THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE AND REJECTED THE SUBMISSIONS. LD. CTT(A) RELIED ON TPO'S ORDER AND R EJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS FOR REJECTION OF ECLERX AS A COMP ARABLE COMPANY: MAERSK GLOBAL CENTRES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED VS. ACIT , MUMBAI [I.T.A. NO.7466/MUM/2012/AY 2007-08] ; UNITED HEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. [ITA NO.6312/DEL/2012/AY 2007-08] ; I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 14 -: CALIBRATED HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. [ITA NO. 527L/DEL/201 2/AY 2007-08] ; HYUNDAI MOTORS INDIA ENGINEERING P. LTD. [ITA NO.1 850/HYD/20 12/A Y 2007-08] IV. MAPLE ESOLUTIONS LIMITED ('MAPLE'): UNRELIABLE FINANCIALS: IT WAS THE CONTENTION THAT THE DI RECTORS OF MAPLE WERE FOUND TO BE INVOLVED IN FRAUD AND ACCORDI NGLY ITS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CANNOT BE TRUSTED AND ARE NOT RELIABL E. TPO DID NOT AGREE TO THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE AND REJECTED THE SUBMISSIONS. LD. CIT(A) RELIED ON TPO'S ORDER AND R EJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS FOR REJECTION OF MAPLE AS A COMPA RABLE COMPANY: CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., HYDERA BAD VS. DCIT [ITA NO. 1961/HYD/2011] 22.3. LD. DR IN REPLY HOWEVER, SUBMITTED THAT AS FAR A S MAPLE IS CONCERNED, THE FRAUD HAS OCCURRED IN EARLIER YEAR AND CO- ORDINATE BENCH AT BANGALORE HAS ACCEPTED THE COMPARABL E IN THEIR ORDER IN M/S. AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD., I N IT(TP)A NO. 879/BANG/2013 DT. 16-03-2016. THIS COMPANY IS TO BE ACCEPTED AS COMPARABLE. WITH REFERENCE TO THE OTHER COMPANIES O F ECLERX AND MOLD-TEK TECHNOLOGIES LTD., IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AS SESSEE- COMPANY FALLS IN BETWEEN AND KPO AND BPO. THEREFOR E, THE ACTION OF THE TPO IS CORRECT. HE ALSO REFERRED TO THE ORDER OF TPO THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTIONS. I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 15 -: 22.4. IN REPLY, LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE DI D OBJECT TO THE COMPARABLES BEFORE THE TPO AND FURTHER BEFORE THE CIT(A) ALSO. WITH REFERENCE TO MAPLE E SOLUTIONS LIMITED., IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT HYDERABAD BENCH IN THE CASE OF CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., HAS DELETED THE COMPANY. WITH REFERENCE TO THE KPO AND BPO, LD. COUNSEL RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAMPGREEN SOLUTIONS PVT LIMITED VS. CIT IN ITA NO 102/2015 DT 1 0-08-2015 AND SUBMITTED THAT THIS COMPANY IS TO BE EXCLUDED. 23. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERU SED THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY ASSESSEE. AS FAR AS MOLD-TE K TECHNOLOGIES LTD., IS CONCERNED, THE OBJECTIONS OF ASSESSEE ARE TO B E ACCEPTED AS THE SAID COMPANY WAS EXCLUDED IN THE FOLLOWING CASES BY THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH DECISIONS: I. MAERSK GLOBAL CENTRES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED VS. ACI T, MUMBAI [I.T.A. NO.7466/MUM/2012/AY 2007-08]; II. CAPITAL IQ IN FORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT [32 TAXMANN.COM 21 (2013) (HYD ITAT)]; III. AVINEON INDIA (P) LTD., VS. DCIT [41 TAXMANN.COM 334 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] IV. C3I SUPPORT SERVICES (P) LTD., VS. ACIT [46 TAXMANN.C OM 453 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] 23.1. AS THIS COMPANY WAS ANALYSED AND ALREADY EXC LUDED, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME WE REJECT THE DRS OBJ ECTIONS AND DIRECT THE TPO TO EXCLUDE THIS COMPANY FROM THE LIST OF COMPARABLES. I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 16 -: 23.2. WITH REFERENCE TO VISHAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGI ES LTD., ALSO THIS COMPANY IS FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT AND WAS H ELD NOT COMPARABLE IN THE FOLLOWING CASES: I. CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS. DCI T [32 TAXMANN.COM 21 (2013) (HYD ITAT)]; II. AVINEON INDIA (P) LTD., VS. DCIT [41 TAXMANN.COM 334 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] III. C3I SUPPORT SERVICES (P) LTD., VS. ACIT [46 TAXMANN.C OM 453 (2014) (HYD ITAT)] IV. BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. ACIT [ITA NO. 1154/HYD/2011 (HYD ITAT)] SINCE THIS COMPANY IS ALREADY HELD TO BE NOT COMPARABL E IN SIMILAR CASES, WE DIRECT THE TPO TO EXCLUDE THE ABOVE COMPANY. 23.3. ECLERX SERVICES LIMITED : THIS COMPANY IS ALSO OBJECTED TO AS IT IS INVOLVED IN KPO BUSINESS. THIS C OMPANY IS ALREADY EXCLUDED IN THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH DECISION CI TED ABOVE IN THE SUBMISSIONS. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING, WE DIRECT THE TPO TO EXCLUDE THIS COMPANY. 23.4. MAPLE ESOLUTIONS LTD: THIS COMPANY ALSO HAS UN- RELIABLE FINANCIALS AS DIRECTORS OF MAPLE ESOLUTIONS LTD., ARE FOUND TO BE INVOLVED IN FRAUD. UNDER COMPANY LAW, ONCE DI RECTOR IS INVOLVED IN FRAUD, THE OFFENCE CONTINUES FOR LATER YE ARS ALSO. THIS COMPANY IS EXCLUDED IN THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN HYDERABAD IN THE CASE OF CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 17 -: PVT. LTD. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE DIRECT THE TPO TO EXCLUDE THE ABOVE COMPANY. 23.5. THE GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED ACCORDINGLY. 24. WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENTS: THE GROUND PERTAINING IS AS UNDER: GROUND NO. 7: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, TPO ERRED AND THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING/ CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TPO IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT OF 2.27% AND NOT PROVIDING DOWNWARD ADJUSTMENT TO THE MARK-UP OF COMPARABLE COMPANIES IN-SPITE OF BEING QUANTIFIED B Y THE APPELLANT. 24.1. ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE EXISTS DIFFERENCE IN THE DEBTORS AND CREDITORS OF ASSESSEE AND THE COMPARABLE C OMPANIES SELECTED BY TPO, WHICH MATERIALLY AFFECT THE AMOUNT OF NET PROFIT MARGIN IN THE OPEN MARKET. ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THE WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT OF THE COMPANY WAS CALCULATED AT 2.27%. ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ONCE THE SAID WOR KING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT IS GRANTED TO THE COMPANY, THE ALP WIL L FALL WITHIN +/- 5% RANGE AS PER THE PROVISO TO SECTION 92C( 2) OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY TP ADJUSTMENT ON THE COMPANY. TPO REJECTED THE WORKINGS AND SUBMISSION OF ASSESSEE FOR WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT BY STATING THAT APPROACH A DOPTED IS BASED ON SEVERAL ASSUMPTIONS. . LD. CIT(A) RELIED ON TPO'S ORDER AND REJECTED THE SUBMISSION OF ASSESSEE. 24.2. ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AND PLACE D RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS FOR GRANT OF WOR KING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT: I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 18 -: CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. [ITA NO.196I/HYD/20L L] ; UNITED HEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. [ITA NO.6312/DEL/2012/AY 2007-08] ; SUN LIFE INDIA SERVICE CENTRE PVT. LTD., [ITA NO.5799/DEL/2012]. 24.3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS WE ARE O F THE OPINION THAT TPO SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED THE WORKING CAPITA L ADJUSTMENT AS WAS DONE IN THE OTHER CASES OF CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND UNITED HEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD., WHICH ARE SIMILARLY PL ACED LIKE THAT OF ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT AFTER EXCLUDING THE ABOVE COMPANIES CONTESTED IN ABOVE GROUNDS THIS C ONTENTION MAY BECOME ACADEMIC. TPO IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE I SSUE AND SEE WHETHER ASSESSEES OPERATIONS ARE WITHIN THE MARGIN PROVIDED U/S. 92CA AND IF IT IS NOT THEN, THE TPO IS DIRECTED TO MAKE NECESSARY WORKING CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT, IF WARRANTED. 25. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS AND DIRECTIONS, ASSESSEES GROUNDS ARE CONSIDERED ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOS ES. REVENUES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 301/HYD/2014 : 26. THE ONLY ISSUE IN REVENUES APPEAL IS EXCLUSIO N OF LEASE LINE CHARGES FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER AS DIRECTED BY TH E CIT(A) . LEASE LINE CHARGES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE EXPORT TURN OVER BY THE AO. LD.CIT(A) DIRECTED THE SAME TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER AS WELL. I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 19 -: 26.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTI ES ON THE ISSUE AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. THIS I SSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBA Y HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GEM PLUS JEWELLERY INDIA LTD., [330 ITR 175] (BOM) AND ALSO SPECIAL BENCH DECISION OF THE ITAT, C HENNAI IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. SAK SOFT LTD. [313 ITR (AT) 353] WHER EIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT COMMUNICATION CHARGES ETC., ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE DELIVERY OF THE COMPUTER SOFTWARE OUTSIDE INDIA WHICH ARE TO BE REDUCED FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER SHOULD BE REDUCED FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER AS WELL, WHILE COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION U/S. 10A. THER EFORE, FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE AFORESAID CASES, WE AFFIRM THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) TO REDUCE THE SAME FROM THE EXPORT T URNOVER AS WELL AS TOTAL TURNOVER WHILE COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION U/S. 10A OF THE I.T. ACT. THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS ACCORDINGLY R EJECTED. 27. TO SUM-UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES AND REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH DECEMBER, 2016 SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER HYDERABAD, DATED 16 TH DECEMBER, 2016 TNMM I.T.A. NOS. 221 & 301/HYD/14 BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED :- 20 -: COPY TO : 1. BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, (FORMERLY KN OWN AS BA CONTINUUM SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED), BUILDING N O. 5, K. RAHEJA MIND SPACE, HITECH CITY, MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD . 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2 ), HYDERABAD. 4. CIT(APPEALS)-V, HYDERABAD. 5. CIT-I, HYDERABAD. 6. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 7. GUARD FILE.