INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ARIBA TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD, BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2668/BANG/2017Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 April 2018AY 2005-064 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 upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that foreign travel expenses excluded from export turnover should also be reduced from total turnover for Section 10A deduction calculation, following the jurisdictional High Court's precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 10A for software development services. The Assessing Officer disallowed a portion of the claim and made a TP adjustment. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, following a High Court decision regarding the exclusion of foreign travel expenses from export turnover.

What were the issues?

Whether foreign travel expenditure incurred outside India for rendering technical services should be excluded from total turnover when it is excluded from export turnover for the purpose of Section 10A deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10A,Section 92CA,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘ A ’

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI JASON P BOAZ

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (D.R)

O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz A.M. : This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Bangalore dated 31.07.2017 for Assessment Year 2005-06.

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as under:-

1.

2.1 The assessee, a company engaged in the business of providing software development services, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2005-06 on 30.10.2005 declaring total income of Rs.50,070 after, inter alia, claiming deduction u/s. 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 26.12.2008 wherein the assessee’s income was determined at Rs.1,41,91,817 in view of, inter alia, the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) disallowing the assessee’s excess claim for deduction u/s. 10A of the Act and making a T.P. Adjustment of Rs.1,39,96,932 under Section 92CA of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A)-1, Bangalore partly allowed the assessee’s appeal vide order dated 31.07.2017. In doing so, the ld. CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s. 10A of the Act following the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v Tata Elxsi Ltd. (349 ITR 98) (Kar).

3.1 Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A)-1, Bangalore dated 31.07.2017 for Assessment Year 2005-06, Revenue has filed this appeal, raising the following grounds:-

3.2 The ld. DR was heard in support of the grounds raised. 3.3 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncement cited. As regards the issue of reduction of the items of foreign travel expenditure incurred in foreign currency for rendering of technical services outside India, the jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT v Tata Elxsi Ltd (349 ITR 98) (Kar) has held that when certain expenses are excluded from the export turnover for the purposes of computing deduction admissible under the Act; like u/s. 10A of the Act, such expenses are also to be excluded from total turnover, as export turnover is a part of total turnover. The decision in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd (supra) has also been followed by the Hon’ble Court in its order in the case of DCIT v Motor Industries Co. Ltd., (ITA No. 776/2006, 744/2007 and 1155/2006 dated 13.06.2014), holding that if any expenditure is sought to be removed from export turnover, then it should also be reduced from total turnover for the purposes of computing the eligible deduction u/s. 10A of the Act. In this legal and factual matrix of the case, as discussed above, we find no reason to interfere with or deviate from the finding rendered by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue, and therefore uphold the same. Consequently, the grounds S.Nos. 1 to 4 raised by revenue are dismissed. 4. In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2005-06 is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 12th April, 2018. Sd/- Sd/- (N.V. VASUDEVAN) (JASON P BOAZ) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dt. 12.04.2018.

More judgments on Section 10A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →