Held that IBPO Ltd. could not be included as it was in possession of brand value and intangibles which influenced the financial results. Huge turnover companies could not be considered comparable to smaller companies such as the assessee therein. The Assessing Officer/the Transfer Pricing Officer was to exclude I BPO Ltd. from the final list of comparables for the information technology enabled services segment. That if an extraordinary event had taken place by way of amalgamation that company could not be considered comparable one. The Assessing Officer/the Transfer Pricing Officer was to exclude SPI Ltd. from the final set of comparables for the information technology enabled services segment. That ES Ltd. was functionally dissimilar and engaged in knowledge process outsourcing and business process outsourcing services. Amalgamation with A impacted the profits of the company. The company could not be considered a comparable. Working capital adjustment the Matter was remanded. (AY.2016-17)
EIT Services India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy CIT (2022)100 ITR 490 (Bang) (Trib)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparable–Company having huge turnover and high profit margin and owning intangible intellectual property rights-Companies to be excluded-Company satisfying export turnover-To be included-Business process outsourcing activity”-Companies to be included-Working capital adjustment-Matter remanded. [S.92D R. 10B]