DCIT, Circle-17(2), Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. Virtusa India Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 409/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 40922514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VALLURI SRINIVAS
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction; Wholly owned subsidiary
• Section: 143(3); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO.409/HYD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 DCIT, CIRCLE 17(2) HYDERABAD. VS. M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD 32. PAN AABCV4077E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA.NO.415/HYD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD 32. PAN AABCV4077E VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 17(2) HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR REVENUE : MR. VALLURI SRINIVAS FOR ASSESSEE : MR. RAVI BHARADWAJ DATE OF HEARING : 2 0 . 1 0 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 .12 .2015 ORDER PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. BOTH THE ABOVE ARE CROSS-APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REVENUE FOR THE A.Y. 2010-2 011 AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 09.02.2015 PASSE D BY THE A.O. UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 144 C OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, WHICH IS WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF VIRTUS A CORPORATION, USA (WITH 99.99% SHAREHOLDING) IS ENGA GED IN PROVIDING SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PRIMARIL Y TO ITS A.E. THE ASSESSEE HAS TWO SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT CENTERS IN CHENNAI AND HYDERABAD, BOTH OF WHICH ARE REGISTERED UNDER THE STPI SCHEME OF GOVERNMENT OF I NDIA AS 100% EXPORT ORIENTED UNITS. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND AS PER THE 3CE B REPORT, THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTE RED INTO INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS WITH ITS A.E. 2.1. THE A.O. THEREFORE, REFERRED THE DETERMINATIO N OF THE ARMS LENGTH PRICE (ALP) OF THE INTERNATION AL TRANSACTIONS TO THE TPO UNDER SECTION 92CA OF THE I .T. ACT. THE FINANCIALS OF THE TAXPAYER I.E., THE ASSES SEE HEREIN FOR THE F.Y. 2009-2010 WERE AS UNDER : DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ( IN RS.) OPERATING REVENUE 196,98,88,305 OPERATING COST 172,58,21,043 OPERATING PROFIT 24,40,67,262 OP/OR (%) 13.39 OP/OC (%) 14.14 BEFORE THE TPO, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT FOR THE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AFTER APPLYING CERTA IN FILTERS, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS SHORTLISTED 21 COMPANIES AS COMPARABLES WHOSE ARITHMETIC MEAN/PLI (OP/OC) IS COMPUTED AT 11.26% AS AGAINST THE PLI OF THE ASSESSEE AT 12.96%. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE 3 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. MARGINS OF THE ASSESSEE FROM THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS FALL WITHIN + OR 5% RANGE WITH THE COMPARABLES, THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS ARE AT ARMS LENGTH AND HENCE, NO ADJUSTMENT IS REQUIRED. HOWEVE R, THE TPO NOTICED CERTAIN DEFECTS IN THE ASSESSEES S EARCH PROCESS AND THEREFORE, REJECTED THE T.P. STUDY OF T HE ASSESSEE. AFTER CONDUCTING HIS OWN SEARCH ON THE DA TA BASE, PROWESS AND CAPITALINE PLUS, HE DETERMINED TH E FOLLOWING 19 COMPANIES AS COMPARABLES SL. NO. NAME OF THE COMPANY 1. ACCELYA KALE SOLUTIONS LTD., 2. AVANI CIMCON TECHNOLOGIES LTD., 3. CAT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., 4. COMP - U - LEARN TECH INDIA LTD., 5. E - INFOCHIPS BANGALORE LTD., 6. EVOK TECH 7. E - ZEST SOLUTIONS LTD., 8. INFOSYS TECHNOLOGY LTD., 9. KALS INFORMATION SYSTEMS LTD., (SEG.) 10. KULIZA TECH 11. L & T INFOTECH LTD., 12. MINDTREE LTD., (SEG.) 13. PERSISTENT SYSTEMS & SOLUTIONS LTD., (MERGED) 14. R S SOFTWARE (INDIA) LTD., 15. SASKEN COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES LTD., 16. TATA ELXSI LTD., (SEG.) 17. THINKSOFT GLOBAL SERVICES LTD., 8. ZYLOG SYSTEMS LTD., 19. PERSISTENT SYSTEMS LTD., 2.2. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED ITS OBJECTIONS TO THE COMPARABLE COMPANIES SELECTED BY THE TPO. HOWEVER, THE TPO REJECTED THE ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS AND PROCEED ED TO 4 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. COMPUTE THE AVERAGE MARGIN OF THE COMPARABLES AT 22.69% BY ADOPTING TNMM AS THE MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD. THEREAFTER, AFTER MAKING THE WORKING CAPITA L ADJUSTMENT, THE ADJUSTED ARMS LENGTH MARGIN WAS ARR IVED AT 21.74% AND ARRIVED AT THE SHORTFALL OF RS.13,05, 57,916 UNDER SECTION 92CA OF THE ACT. 2.3. BASED ON THE T.P. ORDER, THE A.O. PASSED THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER AND FORWARDED THE SAME TO TH E ASSESSEE FOR ITS OBJECTIONS, IF ANY. THE ASSESSEE F ILED ITS OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE DRP. THE DRP DIRECTED THE A.O . TO EXCLUDE THE FOLLOWING COMPANIES FROM THE LIST OF COMPANIES VIZ., (1) INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD., (2) L & T INFOTECH LTD., AND (3) TATA ELEXI LTD., AGAINST THE ASSESSEES OBJECTIONS TO THE INCLUSION OF CERTAIN COMPANIES AS COMPARABLES, THE DRP CONFIRMED THE ORD ER OF THE TPO. THE A.O. PASSED THE FINAL ASSESSMENT OR DER IN CONSONANCE WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE DRP. THE REVE NUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE EXCLUSION OF INFOSYS TECHN OLOGY LTD., L & T INFOTECH LTD., AND TATA ELXSI LTD., WHI LE THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE RETENTIONS OF THE COMPARABL ES BY THE DRP IN SPITE OF ASSESSEES OBJECTIONS TO THE AD OPTION OF THE SAME. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CHART SHOWING THE COMPARABLES SELECTED BY THE TPO WHICH HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO THE COMPARABLES WHICH ARE BEING CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REVENUE A ND IS 5 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. ALSO SEEKING THE INCLUSION OF CERTAIN COMPANIES AS COMPARABLES WHICH HAVE BEEN REJECTED BY THE TPO. AS THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT DISPUTED THE CORRECTNESS OF THE FA CTS IN THE CHART FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME IS TAKEN ON RECORD. 3.1. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS THOUGH RAISED AS MA NY AS 8 GROUNDS OF APPEAL, GROUND NO.1 IS GENERAL IN N ATURE AND NEEDS NO ADJUDICATION, WHILE GROUND NO.7 IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE AND GROUND NO.8 IS PREMATUR E. AS REGARDS THE OTHER GROUNDS, HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT PRESSING ANY OF THE OTHER GROUNDS SERIOUSLY EXCEPT GROUND NO.3 AND PARTICULARLY THE INCLUSION OF E-INFOCHIPS BANGALORE LTD., ONLY. 4. TAKING THE SAME INTO CONSIDERATION, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE AS TO WHETHER E-INFOCHIPS BANGALO RE LTD., IS COMPARABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS THE CON TENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT WHILE THE ASSESSEE IS INTO ONLY P ROVIDING SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO ITS A.E., E-INFOC HIPS BANGALORE LTD., IS FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT AS IT IS ENGAGED IN RENDERING OF BOTH I.T. AND ITES SERVICES. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE FINANCIALS OF E-INFOCHIPS BANGAL ORE LTD., ALSO DOES NOT GIVE SEGMENTAL DATA AND THERE A RE HUGE VARIATIONS IN THE MARGINS OF THE SAID COMPANY FROM THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE SAID COMPA NY IS HAVING AN AMALGAMATION STATUS (NOT ACTIVE) AS IS EV IDENT 6 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. FROM THE DATA AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE OF THIS COMP ANY. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE MARGIN COMPUTATION OF THIS COMPANY AND FOR ALL THESE REASO NS, ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THIS COMPANY HAS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE FINAL COMPARABL ES SELECTED BY THE TPO AND AS CONFIRMED BY THE DRP. 5. THE LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE TPO AND THE DRP. 6. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD R AISED OBJECTIONS ABOUT INCLUSION OF THIS COMPANY (E-INFOC HIPS BANGALORE LTD.,) BEFORE THE TPO BUT THE TPO AFTER CONSIDERING THE FINANCIALS OF THIS COMPANY HAS RETA INED THIS COMPANY AS A COMPARABLE. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED THE FINANCIALS OF E-INFOCHIPS BANGALORE LTD. BEFORE US. ON COMPARISON OF THE PARTICULARS CONSIDE RED BY THE TPO AND THE PARTICULARS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE B EFORE US WITH REGARD TO THIS COMPANY, WE FIND THAT THERE ARE VARIATIONS IN THE DETAILS. IN THE FINANCIALS SUBMIT TED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT E-INFOCH IPS BANGALORE LTD., IS A COMPANY PRIMARILY ENGAGED IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND I.T. ENABLED SERVICES AND IN SCHEDULE-7 RELATING TO INCOME FROM THE SOFTWARE SER VICES, THERE IS NO BREAK-UP OF THE INCOME FROM SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND I.T. ENABLED SERVICES. FURTHER, FRO M THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US AS I S AVAILABLE IN THE MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS, GOV ERNMENT 7 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. OF INDIA, E-INFOCHIPS BANGALORE LTD., IS IN THE STA TUS OF AMALGAMATED DURING THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. T HIS INFORMATION IS FRESH INFORMATION WHICH WAS NOT AVAI LABLE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARI TY AND READY REFERENCE, THE INFORMATION RELATING TO THIS C OMPANY WHICH IS REPRODUCED BY THE TPO IN HIS ORDER AT PAGE 36 AND THE INFORMATION PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y BEFORE US AT PAGES 10 AND 11 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER RESPECTIVELY FOR READY REFERENCE. (PAGE 36 OF THE T.P. ORDER) TPOS COMMENTS ON TAXPAYERS ARGUMENTS : IN THIS REGARD, AS PER THE ANNEXURE TO DIRECTORS REPORT AND THE DISCLOSURES GIVEN IN THE ANNEXURE TO AUDITORS REPORT IS MENTIONED THAT THE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN DEVELOPMENT OF SOFTWARE. THE SAME IS PRODUCED BELOW : B. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT : THE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN DEVELOPMENT OF SOFTWARE AS PER THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS OF CLIENTS. 2. THE COMPANY IS IN SOFTWARE BUSINESS AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY PHYSICAL INVENTORY. THEREFORE, THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE-4(II) OF THE COMPANIES (AUDITO RS REPORT) ORDER, 2003 ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE COMPANY. FURTHER, THE TAXPAYER HAS REPORTED ITS INCOME TO BE DERIVED FROM SOFTWARE SERVICES. THE RELEVANT EXTRAC T OF P & L ACCOUNT IS AS UNDER - 8 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. SCHEDULE 2009-2010 RS. 2008-2009 RS. INCOME FROM SOFTWARE SERVICES 7 430,466,481 503,658,971 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES 8 206,674,788 212,384,050 IN NOTES TO THE ACCOUNTS, THE FOLLOWING DISCLOSURES IS MADE - (C) INVENTORIES : UNBILLED REVENUE (SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT) IS VAL UED AT COST. (F) SALES AND OTHER INCOME : (I) REVENUE FROM SOFTWARE SERVICES IS RECOGNIZED AS PER THE TERMS OF RELEVANT AGREEMENTS/DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTS. 9. THE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE. THE PRODUCTION AN D SALES OF SOFTWARE CANNOT BE EXPRESSED IN ANY GENERI C UNIT. HJENCE, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO GIVE THE QUANTITATIVE DETAILS OF SALES AND CERTAIN OTHER INFORMATION AS REQUIRED UND ER PARAGRAPH 3.4C AND 4D OF PART-II OF SCHEDULE-VI TO THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE CONTENTION OF THE TAXPAYE R IS REJECTED AND THE COMPANY IS RETAINED AS A COMPARABL E. (PAGE 10 AND 11 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE) 16. SEGMENT INFORMATION : INFORMATION ABOUT PRIMARY SEGMENTS : THE COMPANY IS PRIMARILY ENGAGED IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND I.T. ENABLED SERVICES WHICH IS CONSIDERED THE ONLY REPORTABLE BUSINESS SEGMENT AS 9 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. PER ACCOUNTING STANDARD AS 17 SEGMENT REPORTING ISSUED BY MANDATORY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS PRESCRIBED IN COMPANIES (ACCOUNTING STANDARD) RULES, 2006 AND THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956. INFORMATION ABOUT SECONDARY SEGMENTS SALES BY MARKET - THE COMPANY HAS ONLY ONE GEOGRAPHICAL SEGMENT, I.E., USA. E-INFOCHIPS BANGALORE LTD., SCHEDULES FORMING PART OF PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT SCHEDULE : 7 : INCOME FROM SOFTWARE SERVICES 2010-11 2009-10 INCOME FROM SOFTWARE SERVICES 279,890,393 371,388,107 6.1. SINCE THE INFORMATION CONSIDERED BY THE A.O. SAID TO BE BELONGING TO E-INFOCHIPS BANGALORE LTD., AND THE INFORMATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US ARE AT VARIANCE WITH EACH OTHER, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAN D THE COMPARABILITY OF THIS COMPANY WITH THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF A.O./TPO TO ASCERTAIN THE CORRECT FACTS AND TAKE A DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. IT IS NO DOUBT SET TLED BY VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS THAT WHERE SEGMENTAL D ATA IS NOT AVAILABLE, SUCH COMPANY CANNOT BE TAKEN AS A COMPARABLE. FURTHER, IT HAS ALSO BEEN HELD THAT IF THERE IS AN EXTRAORDINARY EVENT SUCH AS MERGER/AMALGAMATION, EVEN THEN, SUCH COMPANY CANNOT BE TAKEN AS A COMPARABLE TO AN ASSESSEE. THE A.O./TPO SHALL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SUCH JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS BEFORE TAKIN G A DECISION ABOUT THE COMPARABILITY OF E-INFOCHIPS BAN GALORE LTD., WITH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. ACCORDINGLY, ASSES SEES 10 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. APPEAL IS TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS OTHER GROUNDS ARE ALL REJECTED AS NOT PRESSED. ITA.NO.409/HYD/2015 : (REVENUES APPEAL) 7. COMING TO THE REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST THE DIRECTIONS OF THE DRP TO EXCLUDE INFOSYS TECHNOLOGY LTD., L & T INFOTECH LTD., AND TATA ELXSI LTD., FROM THE FINAL LIST OF COMPARABLES, WE FIND THAT THE DRP HAS DIRECTED T HAT THESE COMPANIES TO BE EXCLUDED ON THE GROUND OF FUNCTIONAL DISSIMILARITY. THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED U PON THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FO R THE A.Y. 2007-08 WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS DIRECTED THAT INFOSYS TECHNOLOGY LTD., BE EXCLUDED FROM THE LIST OF COMPARABLES ON ACCOUNT OF FUNCTIONAL DISSIMILARITY AND OWNING OF SIGNIFICANT INTANGIBLES AND BRAND VALUE. AS REGARDS L & T INFOTECH LTD. IS CONCERNED, THIS TRIB UNAL HAS DIRECTED THAT L & T INFOTECH LTD., BE EXCLUDED AS SEGMENTAL DATA IS NOT AVAILABLE AND WAS REJECTED BY THE TPO IN THE EARLIER YEARS ON THIS GROUND ALONE. AS R EGARDS TATA ELXSI LTD., THE TRIBUNAL HAS DIRECTED THAT THI S COMPANY BE EXCLUDED ON FUNCTIONAL DISSIMILARITY. 8. THE LD. D.R., THOUGH, HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE TPO AND A.O., HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO BRI NG ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE FACTS IN THIS Y EAR ARE IN ANY WAY DIFFERENT FROM THE FACTS IN THE A.Y. 200 7-08. 11 ITA.NOS. 409 & 415/HYD/2015 M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., HYDERABAD. 9. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF T HE DRP AND THE REVENUES APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 10. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 11. TO SUM-UP, ITA.NO.415/HYD/2015 OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND ITA.NO.409/HYD/2015 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23.12.2015. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 23 RD DECEMBER, 2015 VBP/- COPY TO : 1. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 17(2), 6 TH FLOOR, B - BLOCK, I.T. TOWERS, A.C. GUARDS, HYDERABAD. 2. M/S. VIRTUSA INDIA P. LTD., SY.NO.115/PART, PLOT NO.10, NANAKRAMGUDA (V), SERILINGAMPALLY, HYDERABAD 32. 3. DISPUTES RESOLUTION PANEL, 2 ND FLOOR, I.T. TOWERS, 10 - 2 - 3, A.C. GUARDS, HYDERABAD 500 004. 4 . CIT - I II/MEMBER DRP , HYDERABAD 5. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (T.P.), CHENNAI & MEMBER, DRP, HYDERABAD. 6. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, I.T . TOWERS, 10 - 2 - 3, A.C. GUARDS, H YDERABAD 500 004. 7. CIT - 5, HYDERABAD 500 004. 5 . D.R. ITAT B BENCH, HYDERABAD. 6 . GUARD FILE