Case Law Details
Orange Business Services India Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the orders, including the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 6928/Del/2017 for assessment year 2013-14. The Tribunal (supra) in para 22nd and 23rd has directed as under:
“22. In the first round of litigation, ld. TPO in this case had proceeded to benchmark international transaction qua CSDS and ITES segment by adopting aggregated approach. Now, as per our findings returned in the preceding paras, both the segment i.e. CSDS and ITES are required to be benchmarked independently. Ld. AR for the taxpayer as well as ld. DR for the Revenue have contended in one voice that the issue of benchmarking both the segments independently is required to be remanded back to the ld. TPO as the entire exercise of benchmarking international transactions are to be redone.
23. Since the issue of benchmarking the international transaction is required to be examined qua both the segments i.e. CSDS and ITES separately and independently for factual analysis of taxpayer’s TP study, the case is remanded back to ld. TPO who shall determine the ALP of international transactions of both the segments independently afresh after providing an opportunity of being heard to the parties. Consequently, the appeal filed by the taxpayer is allowed for statistical purposes.”
Both the parties agreed that there is no change in functional profile of the assessee and nature of transactions in the year under consideration as compared to AY 2013-14, therefore following the finding of the Tribunal (supra), we set aside the finding of lower authorities and remit the matter back to the Learned AO/TPO for determining arm’s-length price of international transaction of Contract Software Development services (CSD) and ITes in segregated manner complying the direction of the Tribunal (supra) in assessment year 2013-14. It is needless to mention that the assessee shall be afforded adequate opportunity of being heard. The grounds No. 3 to 3.9 of the appeal are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
