DCIT, Bangalore V. M/s Siri Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

ITA 788/BANG/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9397 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Related party transaction

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH B, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A NOS. A.Y. APPELLANT V S RESPONDENT 1 788(BANG)/2012 2005-06 DCIT, CIRCLE- 12(3), BANGALORE M/S SIRI TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD.,38/C-23, SOUTH END ROAD, BANGA L ORE 2 C. O. 161/B/2015 2005-06 M/S SIRI TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD.,38/C-23, SOUTH END ROAD, BANGALORE DCIT, CIRCLE- 12(3), BANGALORE REVENUE BY : SHRI AR V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT ASSESSEE : SHRI P.C.KHINCHA, CA DATE OF HEARING : 11-08-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08-09-2016 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS APPEAL IS BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTI ON IS BY THE ASSESSEE AND THESE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER P ASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-IV, BANGALORE DATED 28-03-2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S: 2005-06. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1 . THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS OPPOSED TO LAW A ND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2.ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE SIZE , TURNOVER AND BRAND OF THE COMPAN Y ARE DECIDING FACTORS FOR TREATING A COMPANY AS A COMPARABLE , AND ACCORDINGLY ERRED IN EXCLUDING M I S IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD , FLEXTRONICS SOFTWARE SYSTEM LTD ., L&T INFOTECH LTD AND M I S INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD AS COMPARABLES. IT(TP)A NOS.788(B)/2012 & C.O. 161(B)/2015 2 3.ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT PROFIT ON COST OF MORE THAN 50% OF THE COMPARABLE COMPANY IS ABNORMAL WITHOUT GIVING REASO NS FOR HOW THE FUNCTIONS DISCHARGED , ASSETS DEPLO Y ED AND RISKS ASSUMED OF SUCH COMPANIES WERE DIFFERENT FROM THE APPELLANT COMPAN Y . 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE TPO OUGHT TO HAVE EXCLUDED COMPARABLES HAVING ANY RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS , NOT ONLY THOSE WITH MORE THAN 25% RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS ON SA LES. 5. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ABO V E GROUNDS MAY BE REVERSED AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY BE RESTORED. 6.THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER , AMEND AND I OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS MENTIONED ABOVE. 3. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS C. O. ARE NOT BEING REPRODUCED AS THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT TED THAT THE C. O. IS NOT PRESSED. 4. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR O F THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT PRESSED AND THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NO OBJECTION EVEN IF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. IN VIEW OF THIS SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE, THE APPEA L OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSE D. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALL OWED AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. IT(TP)A NOS.788(B)/2012 & C.O. 161(B)/2015 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICAL MEMBER AC C OUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : 08.09.2016 AM* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE IT(TP)A NOS.788(B)/2012 & C.O. 161(B)/2015 4 1. DATE OF DICTATION 2. , , DATE ON WHICH TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICT ATING MEMBER .. 3. !' # . $ %# / $ %# # & DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE PS/SR .PS. 4. ''() & * + DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTAT ING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. * . %# / # . . %# # + DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER COMES BACK TO THE PS/SR.PS .. 6 * !', + DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE .. 7. ! !', ' , - ) IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO . 8. .% / 0 + DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. * 1'2 / 34 & 5 + DATE ON WHICH ORDER GOES FOR XEROX &ENDORSEMENT 10. 0 6 / + DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 11. * 7 & 0 8 + THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 12. !) * 9() & 0 9() /#5 . + THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO DESPATCH SECTION FOR DESPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER 13. * 9() + DATE OF DESPATCH OF ORDER .