Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Cura Technologies Limited, Hyderabad, ... vs Dcit, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad, ... on 20 March, 2019
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH "A", HYDERABAD
BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
M.A. No.90/Hyd/2018
(Arising out of ITA No.301/Hyd/2017)
Assessment Year: 2012-13
Cura Technologies Limited, Vs. DCIT,
Hyderabad. Circle-1(2),
PAN: AADCS 2135 A Hyderabad.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by: Sri P. Murali Mohana Rao
Revenue by: Sri H. Phani Raju, DR
Date of hearing: 08/02/2019
Date of pronouncement: 20/03/2019
ORDER
PER Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.:
This application is filed by the assessee seeking rectification of the alleged mistake in the order of the Tribunal dated 11/05/2018. According to the assessee, it has raised Ground No.4 relating to Arms Length Price adjustment towards international transaction of provision of software development services and that ITAT has not adjudicated the Ground No.4(t), which reads as under:
"The Ld DRP erred in not rejecting 4 companies as comparables without appreciating the fact that the said companies cannot be compared with the assessee due to the various reasons such as high turnover / functionally dissimilar / Extraordinary event / no segment data / product based, etc. The list of 4 companies is as under:2
Extra Ordinary Fails TPO filter High Turnover No Segmental Functionality High Brand Dissimilar S. Name of the Comparable Details Value event No. 1 Larsen & Toubro Infotech ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Ltd 2 Mindtree Ltd ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 3 Persistent Systems Ltd ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 4 R S Software (India) Ltd ✓ Therefore, it was prayed that the order may be recalled to decide the said ground on merits.
2. However, at the time of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that instead of recalling the order, it would suffice if the Tribunal, in para 5.2 of its order, would clarify that only the segmental results of the assessee and only the comparables whose segmental results are available should be considered for determining the Arm's Length Price of the International Transaction.
3. Learned Departmental Representative, however, submitted that there was no mistake apparent from record and hence, the Miscellaneous Application is to be dismissed.
4. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, we find that in para 5.2 of the Tribunal's order, we have made it clear that only the segmental results of the assessee and also the segmental results of the comparables have to be taken into consideration. Thus, it is clear that, if the comparables did not have segmental results, such 3 comparables cannot be taken into consideration. Therefore, in our opinion, there is no requirement to give any further direction and there is no mistake apparent from record, which needs rectification. Thus, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is accordingly rejected.
5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is rejected.
Pronounced in the open Court on 20 th March, 2019.
Sd/- Sd/-
(S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (P. MADHAVI DEVI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Hyderabad, Dated: 20 th March, 2019 OKK Copy to:-
1) M/s. Cura Technologies Ltd C/o. P. Murali & Co., Cas, 6 -3- 655/2/3: 1 s t Floor, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500 082.
2) DCIT, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad.
3) Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Bengaluru.
4) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5) Guard File