DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI vs. VERIZON DATA SERVICES PVT. LTD., CHENNAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal confirmed the order of the CIT(Appeals), which directed the exclusion of telecom charges from both export turnover and total turnover. This decision was based on a prior ruling by the same Tribunal.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(Appeals)'s order regarding the computation of eligible profit under Section 10A. The dispute centered on whether telecom charges incurred in foreign currency should be included in export turnover.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the correct treatment of foreign currency telecom charges in the calculation of export turnover for Section 10A benefits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -11, Chennai, dated 31.08.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2009-10.
We heard Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri Sriram Seshadri, the Ld. representative for the assessee. The only issue arises for consideration is computation of eligible profit under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The Assessing Officer included the telecom charges incurred in foreign currency in export turnover and excluded from total turnover. The CIT(Appeals), however, directed the Assessing Officer to exclude the telecom charges both from the export turnover and total turnover. In fact, the CIT(Appeals) placed his reliance on the decision of this Bench of the Tribunal in Ford Business Services Centre in dated 19.02.2016. In view of the above, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.
Order pronounced on 11th June, 2018 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 10A
- Ahaguru Education Technology Private… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1993/CHNY/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- M/S. Aradhyaa Infra & Holdings Pvt. Ltd… vs ITO, Corp. Ward-1(1), ChennaiITA 1793/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs DCIT Cir 2(3), MumbaiITA 7487/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: Disposed24 Aug 2026AY 2008-09
- D.C.I.T. Circle 3(3), Mumbai vs Rbs Business Services P. Ltd., MumbaiITA 4467/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: Disposed14 Aug 2026AY 2007-08
- Rbs Business Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs DCIT Cir 3(3), MumbaiITA 4306/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: Disposed14 Aug 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026