IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No.227/PUN/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.531/PUN/2016) िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2011-12 BMC Software (India) Pvt. Ltd., Business Bay, Wing-1, Ninth Floor, Tower- B, Survey No.103, Hissa No.2, Airport Road, Yerwada, Pune- 411006. PAN : AABCB6110E Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is a Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee seeking modification of order passed by this Tribunal in ITA No.531/PUN/2016 for A.Y. 2011-12 dated 12.05.2022 on the ground that application moved by the respondent-assessee under Rule 27 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 Assessee by : Shri Madhur Agarwal Revenue by : Shri Ganesh B. Budruk Date of hearing : 21.04.2023 Date of pronouncement : 25.04.2023 MA No.227/PUN/2022 2 seeking exclusion of the comparable company, E- Infochips from the set of the comparables in respect of software development services segment and also seeking a risk adjustments of comparable company vis-a-vis the respondent-assessee herein, remain unadjudicated. 2. We had carefully gone through the present Miscellaneous Application as well as the Log Book maintained by us, wherein, it is noted that the petition was heard and rejected during the course of hearing of the appeal itself, same was also announced in the open Court. However, the impugned order does not contain the findings given by us on the petition under Rule 27 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. 3. Therefore, we proceed to clarify that recourse to provisions of Rule 27 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 can be made only to sustain the order of the CIT(A) or the DRP, but not to get a further relief, as it results in adverse affect to the appellant before us. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom.). In the light of above legal position, the MA No.227/PUN/2022 3 petition under Rule 27 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 is dismissed as not maintainable. 4. The paragraph no.3 of this order shall be integral part of order passed by this Tribunal and shall be added as paragraph no.15 in the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case vide ITA No.531/PUN/2016 for A.Y. 2011-12 dated 12.05.2022. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced on this 25 th day of April, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 25 th April, 2023. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The DRP-3, Mumbai. 4. The DIT (TP)-1(1), Pune. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “C” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “C” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.