Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 102 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7695 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 month(s) 1 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
18-05-2023
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
PartlyAllowed
Bench Allotted
C
Next Hearing Date
18-05-2023
Assessment Year
2018-2019
Appeal Filed On
16-02-2023
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P. No. 50/Bang/2023 (in IT(TP)A No. 713/Bang/2022) Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Sprinklr India Pvt. Ltd., 3 rd Floor, East Wing Building No. 3, Block B, Divyashree 770 Town Centre, Off HAL Airport Road, Yamlur PO, Bengaluru – 560 037. PAN: AAQCS9370N Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(1), Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Tata Krishna, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ramesh Babu, Addl. CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 19-05-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 19-05-2023 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present miscellaneous petition is filed by the assessee against the Tribunal order dated 11.01.2023 seeking certain typographic mistakes that has crept in. 2. The Ld.AR submitted that while deciding ground nos. 12.5.1 to 12.5.10, certain comparables were inadvertently missed out in para 11 and 3 comparables were wrongly mentioned therein. Page 2 M.P. No. 50/Bang/2023 (in IT(TP)A No. 713/Bang/2022) 3. The Ld.AR submitted that in para 11 of the impugned order, following 3 comparables were not sought for inclusion and therefore needs to be deleted from the list. a) Enlighten Software Services Pvt. Ltd. b) Sagar soft India Ltd. c) CES Ltd. (segmental) 4. It is submitted that six comparables that were raised in Ground nos. 12.5.4, 12.5.7-12.5.10 needs to be considered for inclusion. He relied on the grounds that are reproduced at page 5 of the impugned order. We have perused the records and we observe that the submissions of the Ld.AR is correct. We therefore rectify the typographic mistake as under. The paragraph 11 shall be henceforth read as under: 11. In Ground no.12.5 the assessee seeks inclusion of the following comparables. a) Celstream Technologies Pvt. Ltd. b) Forgeahead Solutions Pvt. Ltd. c) Kireeti Soft Technologies Ltd. d) Yudiz Solutions Pvt. Ltd. e) MCT India Infotech Pvt. Ltd. f) SmartCloud Infoservices Pvt. Ltd. g) Intelligrape Software Pvt. Ltd. h) Ace Software exports Ltd. i) O F S Technologies Ltd. and j) A S M Technologies Ltd. k) CG-VAK Software & Exports Ltd. l) Inteq Software India Pvt. Ltd. m) Orangescape Technologies Ltd. n) Rheal Software Pvt. Ltd. o) Isummation Technologies Pvt. Ltd. p) Evoke Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Page 3 M.P. No. 50/Bang/2023 (in IT(TP)A No. 713/Bang/2022) 5. The rest of the contents of para 11.1 remains unchanged. 6. The next issue raised by the Ld.AR is in respect of certain comparables that has not been mentioned in the concluding para 12.3 of the impugned order. The Ld.AR submitted that, the entire paras 12.12 – 12.3 relates to the application of turnover filter. The Ld.AR submitted that in para 12.1 of the order, the comparables are listed revealing their turnover that was sought for exclusion by the assessee. 6.1 He submitted that after considering the arguments of the assessee, this Tribunal upheld the turnover filter applicability in respect of 10 out of 11 comparables however two comparables were inadvertently missed out to be mentioned in para 12.3 being Infosys Ltd. and Cybage Software Pvt. Ltd. 7. We have perused the records and find the submissions of the Ld.AR to be correct. We accordingly rectify the above typographic mistake and para 12.3 shall be henceforth read as under: 12.3. We also note that in respect of Exilant Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Tech Mahindra Ltd., Wipro Ltd., Tata Elxsi Ltd., the above ratio would be applicable as these comparables also has a turnover of more that Rs.200 Crores. Accordingly, following the above view, we direct the Ld.AO/TPO to exclude Exilant Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Tech Mahindra Ltd., Larsen & Toubro Infotech Ltd., Mindtree Ltd., Nihilent Ltd., Persistent Systems Ltd., Wipro Ltd., Tata Elxsi Ltd., Infosys Ltd. and Cybage Software Pvt. Ltd. for exceeding turnover limit of Rs.200 crores. Page 4 M.P. No. 50/Bang/2023 (in IT(TP)A No. 713/Bang/2022) 8. In para 14 of the present M.P., the Ld.AR also seeks inclusion of Thirdware Solutions Ltd. in the list wherein the turnover filter has been applied to exclude certain comparables in para 12.3. We note that Thirdware Solutions Ltd. has been considered by this Tribunal separately in para 12.4 wherein it has been excluded on functional dissimilarities. Accordingly the arguments by the Ld.AR that Thirdware Solutions Ltd. should also be excluded on turnover filter is rejected. 9. The rest of the contents of order dated 11/01/2023 passed by this Tribunal shall remain unchanged. In the result, the M.P. filed by the assessee stands partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 19 th May, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 19 th May, 2023. /MS / Copy to: 1. Appellant 4. CIT(A) 2. Respondent 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 3. CIT 6. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore
