Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Pune V. BNY Mellon International Operations (India) Private Limited, Pune

MA 144/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT), Pune, as the applicant, and M/s. BNY Mellon International Operations (India) Private Limited, as the respondent. The Revenue filed a Miscellaneous Application under section 254(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking to recall the Tribunal's order which had allowed the exclusion of two comparables in a transfer pricing adjustment. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal had not discussed one of the comparables, Ninestars Information Technologies Ltd., in their earlier decision. However, the Tribunal found that the issue had been adequately addressed in their previous ruling, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 113036 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 25-12-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PATNAIK

Judgement Text

1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ” सी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “C” :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Miscellaneous Application No.144/PUN/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.88/PUN/2017) Assessment Year: 2012-13 The DCIT, Pune. Vs M/s.BNY Mellon International Operations (India) Private Limited, Tower S-III, Level III, Cybercity, Magarpatta City, Hadapsar, Pune – 411013 PAN: AADCM 9640 E Applicant Respondent Assessee by Shri S R Patnaik – AR Revenue by Shri M.G.Jasnani – DR Date of hearing 21/04/2023 Date of pronouncement 07/07/2023 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This Revenue’s Miscellaneous Application filed u/s. 254(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] seeks to recall Tribunal’s order dated 27.06.2019 passed in its main appeal ITA.No.88/PUN/2017. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the record. 3. This is a Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue. The Revenue has raised the following Ground No.4 “4. The Hon'ble Tribunal has mentioned that ground number 2 is allowed to the assessee. However in ground number 2, inclusion of comparable Ninestars Information Technologies Ltd was also contended by the assessee along with Excel Infoways and Universal Print Systems. Hon'ble tribunal has not discussed anything on this comparable. Therefore the Hon'ble ITAT Bench "C" Pune has not completely adjudicated the Ground No.2 as raised by the Assessee.” 3.1 The Revenue has pleaded that Ground No.2 has not been completely adjudicated in ITA No.88/PUN/2017 order dated 27.06.2019. It is observed that ITAT in its order dated 27.06.2019 in para 4 has held as under: “4. Now, coming to ground of appeal No.2 raised by assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved by the final selection of two comparables i.e. Excel Infoways Ltd. and Universal Print Systems Ltd. Though in ground of appeal, it has referred to three comparables but the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that in case two comparables i.e. Excel Infoways Ltd. and Universal Print Systems Ltd. are excluded, then margins shown by assessee would be within +/- 5% range. He also pointed out that all the other grounds of-appeal raised on TP adjustment would become academic.” 3.2 The ITAT has decided the issue of exclusion of two comparables i.e.Excel Infoways Limited and Universal Print System Limited in para 9, 10 & 11 of the order dated 27.06.2019. The ITAT further held in Para 11 as under : “As pointed out by learned Authorized Representative for the assessee that in case two concerns are excluded from final list of comparables, then the margins shown by assessee would be within +/- 5% range of average margins of comparables finally selected and hence, other TP grounds of appeal become academic. Accordingly, we hold so.” 3.3 Thus, the ITAT has properly adjudicated Ground No.2 of the assessee. Hence, we do not find any mistake apparent from the record. Accordingly, Revenue’s Miscellaneous Application No.144/PUN/2022 is rejected. 4. In the result, Miscellaneous Application of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 7 th July, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 7 th July, 2023/ SGR* आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “सी” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “C” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune.