Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Popular Search: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: cpt :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: empanelment :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: VAT Audit :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: form 3cd :: TDS :: VAT RATES :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: due date for vat payment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
From the Courts »
 Commissioner Of Income Tax (Ltu) Vs. ESPN Software India Ltd.
 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,
 ITO vs. Gymkhana Club (ITAT Chandigarh)
 SRD Nutrients Private Limited vs. CCE (Supreme Court)
 The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Exemption Vs. The Fertilizers Association Of India
 The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Central-1 Vs. Sameer Gupta
 Msd Pharmaceuticals (P)ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr.
 The Chamber Of Tax Consultants vs. UOI (Delhi High Court)
 M/s Ess Distribution (Mauritius) S.N.C.Et Compagnie Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2)(2) International Taxation, New Delhi
 M/s Ess Advertising (Mauritius) S.N.C.Et Compagnie (Earlier Known As M/s Espan Star Sports Mauritius Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2)(2) International Taxation, New Delhi
 The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -9 Vs. Wsp Consultants India Pvt. Ltd.
 ITO vs. Arvind Kumar Jain HUF (ITAT Mumbai)
 ACIT vs. Katrina (Kaif) Rosemary Turcotte (ITAT Mumbai)
  CIT vs. Hewlett Packard Global Soft Ltd (Karnataka High Court) (Full Bench)

The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -9 Vs. Wsp Consultants India Pvt. Ltd.
November, 09th 2017

%                                      Judgment delivered on: 03.11.2017
+       ITA 935/2017

WSP CONSULTANTS INDIA PVT. LTD.                                  ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Appellant            :         Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Adv.

For the Respondent           :         Mr. Kamal Sawhney and Mr. Shikhar Garg and
                                       Mr. Prashant Maherchandani, Advs



CM No. 39550/2017 (condonation of delay)

        For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the
appeal is condoned. Application is disposed of.
ITA 935/2017
1.      The Revenue's appeal urges that the impugned order to the
extent it excluded three comparables in ALP determination, of the
assessee's income, is erroneous.

ITA 935/2017                                                               Page 1 of 4
2.        The assessee is subsidiary of Cyprus based company and is a
global business provider involved in design, engineering, management
consultancy services across the built and nature environment
worldwide. It provides the services to transform the built environment
and restore the natural environment and its expertise in the relative

3.        The brief facts of the case are that the assessee provides design
and engineering services to private environment transporter and
infrastructure sectors, its subsidiary Cyprus based entity which
engages itself in these and other related activities.

4.        The TPO, who had to consider the report filed by the assessee
for ALP determination, took into consideration 16 comparables and
derived the ALP bringing to tax a sum of Rs. 6,55,34,938/-. The DRP
to which the assessee appealed, deleted 7 comparables and at the same
time included 7 more. After giving effect to the DRP's direction, final
adjustments of RS. 3,87,54,545/- was made by the AO.

5.        Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal challenging
inclusion of 3 comparables i.e. Ashok Leyland Projects Services Ltd.,
Kitco Ltd. and Mitcon Consultancy & Engineering Services Ltd., the
ITAT upheld the assessee's contentions.

6.        As far as the first comparable - Ashok Leyland Projects
Services Ltd. is concerned, the ITAT was of the opinion that the major
part of the Revenue derived was from wind energy segment and

ITA 935/2017                                                       Page 2 of 4
secondly that during the relevant year there was an extraordinary
event being merger of ALPSL with Ashok Leyland Wind Project
Services Ltd. and another company which presented a clear possibility
of differential advantage.

7.      With respect to M/s Kitco Ltd. the Tribunal held that it was a
substantial government undertaking and prominent business was from
government entity. So far as Mitcon Consultancy & Engineering
Services Ltd. was concerned, the Tribunal noticed that less than 75%
of revenue derived by this entity was from consultancy services.
Besides it is also engaged in diversified activities such as training and
engaging in laboratories and research etc.

8.      We have heard the counsel for the Revenue who urges that the
rationale for exclusion of three comparables which were high income
entities is unpersuasive.

9.      This Court is of the opinion that the rationale that Ashok
Leyland was deriving major part of its revenue from wind energy
segment and that there was an extraordinary event of merger and
likewise M/s Kitco Ltd. deriving income from government entity and
Mitcon Consultancy & Engineering Services Ltd, is deriving less than
75% revenue from consultancy services, is a reasonable basis for their

10.     Any inclusion or exclusion of comparables per se cannot be
treated as a question of law unless it is demonstrated to the Court that

ITA 935/2017                                                     Page 3 of 4
the Tribunal or any other lower authority took into account irrelevant
consideration or excluded relevant factors in the ALP determination
that impact significantly.

11.     In the present case, we find no such error. Consequently, the
appeal is without merits and is, therefore, dismissed.

                                                S. RAVINDRA BHAT

                                             SANJEEV SACHDEVA
NOVEMBER 03, 2017

ITA 935/2017                                                  Page 4 of 4
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Customer relationship management software CRM software Operational CRM Collaborative CRM

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions