DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S GENERAL MOTORS TECHNICIAL CENTRE PVT. LTD., BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 580/BANG/2016Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 February 2020AY 2011-123 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since a MAP was concluded, the transfer pricing grounds raised by both parties did not survive. The corporate tax issue raised by the revenue was also decided in favor of the assessee, following the Karnataka High Court's judgment in Tata Elxsi Ltd.

What were the facts?

The assessee and revenue filed cross-appeals concerning assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. Both parties agreed that a MAP had been concluded, rendering the transfer pricing grounds moot.

What were the issues?

Whether transfer pricing grounds survive after a MAP conclusion. Whether expenses reduced from export turnover should also be reduced from total turnover for Section 10A deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

  • 349 ITR 89
    349 ITR 89
    4 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI A. K. GARODIA & SMT BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri. Amit Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR, Shri. Amit Gupta, CA
Hearing: 09.12.2019Pronounced: 07.02.2020

O R D E R Per Bench:

These are cross appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12 and these are directed against two separate assessment orders of these two years dated 29.12.2014 for Assessment Year 2010-11 and dated 27.01.2016 for Assessment Year 2011-12 which are passed

IT(TP)A Nos. 206, 289/Bang/2015 and 580, 600/Bang/2016 Page 2 of 3 by AO under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the IT Act, 1961as per the directions of DRP.

2.

These appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this common order for the sake of convenience.

3.

In the course of hearing, it was agreed by both sides that in these 2 years, MAP has been concluded and therefore, TP grounds raised by both parties in these two years do not survive and there is only one corporate tax issue in the appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2011-12 as per ground Nos.8 and 9 but this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd., as reported in 349 ITR 89 and hence, these grounds of the Revenue are liable to be rejected as per this judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court.

4.

We have considered the rival submissions. We find that this is an admitted position of fact that MAP has been concluded for both these two years in respect of assessee company’s transaction with AE in US. Hence, the TP grounds raised by both sides in these two years do not survive and the same are rejected. In addition to this, there is only one Corporate tax issue in the Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 as per grounds 8 and 9 and as per these grounds, this is the grievance of the Revenue that DRP was not right in holding that expenses reduced from export turnover should be reduced from total turnover also for the purpose of computing deduction allowable to the assessee under section 10A of the IT Act, 1961. As per this judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd., (supra), total turnover is sum total of domestic turnover and export turnover and therefore, if an amount is reduced from export turnover, then the total turnover also goes down automatically by the same amount.

IT(TP)A Nos. 206, 289/Bang/2015 and 580, 600/Bang/2016 Page 3 of 3 Respectfully following this judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, we decline to interfere in the AO’s order and DRP’s directions on this issue and accordingly these two grounds 8 in Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 are rejected.

5.

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed.

More judgments on Section 10A

All 2,147 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →