Case LawHigh Court › Ita/207/2019 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of...

Ita/207/2019 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -9 v. Torus Business Solution Pvt. Ltd

High Court 29 Jul 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Ita/207/2019 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -9 v. Torus Business Solution Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
29 Jul 2019
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/207/2019 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -9 v. Torus Business Solution Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 207/2019 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -9..... Appellant Through: Ms.Vibhooti Malhotra, Sr.Standing Counsel. versus TORUS BUSINESS SOLUTION PVT. LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Ajay Vohra, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Rohit Tiwari, Advocate. % CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH O R D E R29.07.2019 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against an order dated 10[th] August 2018 passed by the ITAT in ITA No.1974/Del/2015 for Assessment Year („AY‟) 2010-11. 2. The issue urged by the Revenue in the present case is about the exclusion of comparables which the ITAT held to be functionally different from the Assessee. 3. Three of the comparables involved are Infosys BPO Ltd., TCS E-serve International Ltd. and TCS E-serve Ltd. This Court has very recently by a judgment dated 24[th] July 2019 in ITA 532 of 2019(M/s.Avaya India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT) giving detailed reasons why on the facts of that case, which are more or less similar to the facts on hand, such comparables ought to have been excluded. The said judgment therefore covers the said issue against the Revenue. 4. As far as the comparables Accentia Techonologies Ltd. and E4e Healthcare are concerned, the Tribunal has in the impugned order explained in detail why these also should be excluded. The principles explained by this Court in the aforementioned judgment would be equally applicable to these comparables as well. 5. Further, there are several other orders of this Court upholding the exclusion of the aforementioned comparables. Illustratively reference may be made to the orders in Pr.CIT v. Evalueserve SEZ (Gurgaon) Pvt. Ltd.(order dated 26[th] February 2018 in ITA 241 of 2018), Pr. CIT v. B.C.Management Services (P.) Ltd. 403 ITR 45 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. M/s. Sanvih Info Group Pvt. Ltd. (earlier known as OKS Span Tech ( P.) Ltd. (order dated 16[th] May 2019 in ITA 420 of 2019). 6. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. S. MURALIDHAR, J. JULY 29, 2019 tr TALWANT SINGH, J.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan