Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’, BANGALORE
Before: SHRI A. K. GARODIA & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO
O R D E R PER SHRI A.K.GARODIA, AM
All these three appeals filed by the revenue and these are directed against a combined order of the ld. CIT(A) – 2, Bangalore dated 08-03-2016.
In all these three years, the revenue has raised several grounds but the grievances are only two in each year and these are same in each year.
Therefore, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. The first grievance is about the direction of CIT (A) to the AO to reduce expenditure incurred in foreign currency from total turnover for computing the deduction allowable u/s 10A by following the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd. as reported in 349 ITR 98. The second grievance is about the direction of CIT (A) to the AO to compute and allow the deduction allowable u/s 10A before set off of B/F losses/depreciation by following the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. as reported in 341 ITR 385.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee but since it was seen that both issues are covered by two judgments of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court as noted above, these appeals were heard ex parte qua the assessee. The ld. DR of the revenue supported the assessment orders.
We have considered the rival submissions. We find that it was held by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd. (Supra) that the total turnover is sum total of export turnover and domestic turnover and therefore, if an amount is reduced from the export turnover then the total turnover also goes down by the same amount automatically.
In the present case, ld. CIT (A) has directed the AO to reduce expenditure incurred in foreign currency from total turnover also for computing the deduction allowable u/s 10A because the same was reduced by him from the export turnover. In view of this judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of M/s Tata Elxsi Ltd. (Supra), we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT (A) on this issue and therefore, we decline to interfere with the same. Ground No. 2 in all these three years is rejected.
Regarding the second issue also, we find that the order of CIT (A) on this issue is in line with the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (Supra) and as per the ground no. 3 in each year, this is the only objection of the department that the department has not accepted this judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (Supra) and SLP is filed before Hon’ble Apex Court. Hence, this is not a case of the department that the direction of CIT (A) to the AO on this issue is not in line with this judgment. Hence, even if SLP is filed by the revenue before Hon’ble Apex Court, then also, we are duty bound to follow this judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (Supra) because this is not a case of the department that stay is granted by Hon’ble Apex Court on the operation of this judgment. Moreover, at present, the SLP is also dismissed by Hon’ble Apex Court and therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT (A) on this issue also and hence, we decline to interfere with the same. Ground No. 3 in all these three years is also rejected. Grounds 1 & 4 in all these years are general for which, no separate adjudication is called for.
In the result, all three the appeals of the revenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.