M/s. Inteva Products India Automotive Private Limited (formerly known as Meritor LVS India Private Limited), Bangalore V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 11(4), Bangalore

MA 57/BANG/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7036 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MP NO.57/BANG/2020 [IN IT(TP)A NO.205/BANG/2014] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 INTEVA PRODUCTS INDIA AUTOMOTIVE PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY MERITOR LVS INDIA PVT. LTD.), NO.69, AL-AMEEN TOWERS, HOSUR ROAD, NEAR LALBAGH MAIN GATE, BANGALORE 560 027. PAN: AABCM 9623K VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(4), BANGALORE. APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPL IC ANT BY : SHRI M.P. LOHIA, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PRIYADARSHI MISHRA, JT.CIT(DR)(ITAT), BENGAL URU. DATE OF HEARING : 04.09.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09 .0 9 .2020 O R D E R PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED U/S. 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 [THE ACT] BY THE ASSESSEE PRAYING FOR REC TIFICATION OF CERTAIN APPARENT ERRORS IN THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 02.0 8.2019 PASSED IN THE AFORESAID APPEAL. 2. THE ISSUE THAT AROSE FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL IN THE AFORESAID APPEAL WAS WITH REGARD TO DETERMINATION O F ARMS LENGTH PRICE [ALP] IN RESPECT OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTION OF RE NDERING SOFTWARE MP NO.57/BANG/2020 PAGE 2 OF 3 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BY THE ASSESSEE TO ITS AE. TH E ASSESSEE IN THE APPEAL HAD PRAYED FOR EXCLUSION OF 7 COMPARABLE COM PANIES WHICH ARE SET OUT IN PARAS 8 & 9 OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER. OUT OF THE 7 COMPARABLE COMPANIES, 4 COMPARABLE COMPANIES VIZ., SASKEN COMM UNICATION TECHNOLOGIES LTD., PERSISTENT SYSTEMS LTD., TATA EL XSI LTD. AND INFOSYS LTD. WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED BY THE DECISIONS RENDERED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH IN THE CASE OF SWD SERVICES PROVIDE R SUCH AS THE ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME AY 2009-10. THIS FACT HAS BE EN NOTICED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 9 OF ITS ORDER. WITH REFERENCE TO THE REMAINING 3 COMPANIES, THE LD. DR HAD RAISED OBJECTIONS FOR EXC LUSION AND THOSE COMPANIES HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN PA RAS 11 TO 15 OF ITS ORDER. IN PARA 16, HOWEVER, THERE IS NO CONCLUSION THAT THE 4 COMPANIES VIZ., SASKEN COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES LTD., PERSI STENT SYSTEMS LTD., TATA ELXSI LTD. AND INFOSYS LTD. SHOULD BE EXCLUDED , THOUGH THIS ASPECT HAS BEEN ADMITTED BY THE LD. DR, AS WOULD BE EVIDENT FR OM A READING OF PARAS 9 & 10 OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS, THEREFORE, PRAYED FOR A SPECIF IC FINDING WITH REGARD TO EXCLUSION OF THE AFORESAID 4 COMPANIES. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE AS CO NTAINED IN THE MP. THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE HAS BEEN AN OMISSION IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL I N THE FINAL CONCLUSION ON EXCLUSION OF THE AFORESAID 4 COMPANIES AND THE SAID OMISSION CONSTITUTES A MISTAKE APPARENT ON THE FACE OF RECORD. IT IS CLEA R FROM THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN PARAS 9 & 10 THAT THERE WAS NO DISP UTE THAT THESE 4 COMPANIES WERE TO BE EXCLUDED IN THE LIGHT OF DECIS IONS RENDERED IN THE CASES REFERRED TO BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE AND SET OUT IN THE LAST PARA OF PAGE 6 OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL. WE ARE TH EREFORE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL SUFFERS FROM A MISTAKE AND TH E SAID MISTAKE IS RECTIFIED MP NO.57/BANG/2020 PAGE 3 OF 3 BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE AT THE END OF PARA 16 OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL:- IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID DISCUSSION, WE DIREC T THE TPO TO EXCLUDE ALL THE 7 COMPARABLE COMPANIES SET OUT IN P ARA 9 OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL FROM THE LIST OF COMPARABLE C OMPANIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2020. SD/- SD/- ( B R BASKARAN ) ( N V VASUDEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRE SIDENT BANGALORE, DATED, THE 09 TH SEPTEMBER, 2020. / DESAI S MURTHY / COPY TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, BANGALORE.