DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S COGNIZANT GLOBAL SERVICES PVT. LTD., BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal decided that the exclusion of expenditure from export turnover was against the revenue, following a jurisdictional High Court decision. However, the issue regarding expenditure incurred in foreign currency for technical services was set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The revenue filed three appeals against assessment orders concerning the exclusion of expenditure from export turnover and the nature of expenditure incurred in foreign currency for technical services. These issues were common across the assessment years.
What were the issues?
Whether certain expenditures should be excluded from export turnover for Section 10A deduction, and whether foreign currency expenditure was for technical services or software development.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide 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.
- CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.818 citing349 ITR 98 · 2012 · HC
- Infosys Technologies v. JCIT8 citing109 TTJ 631 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘ B ’
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
Per Bench : This three appeals by the revenue are directed against the assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the
2 IT(TP)A Nos.754 to 756/Bang/2016 Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') for the Assessment Years 2008- 09 to 2010-11. Common grounds are raised in these revenue’s appeals.
We have heard the learned D.R. as well as learned A.R. and considered the relevant material on record. The learned Departmental Representative as well as learned Authorised Representative has pointed out that only two common issues are involved in these appeals regarding (i) the execlusion of expenditure from the export turnover as well as total turnover while computing the deduction under Section 10A of the Act and (ii) the issue of expenditure incurred in foreign currnency for providing technical services outside India or not. Both the representatives of assessee as well as department submitted that these issues are covered by the decision of this Tribunal dt.3.11.2016 in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2007-08 in IT(TP)A No.1278/Bang/2015.
Having considered the rival submissions and careful perusal of record, we find that the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2007-08 vide order dt.3.11.2016
3 IT(TP)A Nos.754 to 756/Bang/2016 (supra) has considered and adjudicated these two issues in paras 5 to 8 as under :
“ 5. We have considered the rival submissions. Regarding ground no.1, we hold that this ground is general in nature and no specific adjudication is called for.
Ground no.2 is dismissed by following the judgment of the Hon‘ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of M/s Tata Elxsi Ltd Vs ACIT(Supra) 7. For Ground no.3, we find that the issue in dispute has been decided by the ld. CIT(A) as per para-4.4 of his order which is re- produced herein below: “4.4 The question for consideration is whether the appellant was engaged in rendering technical services so as to be deprived of the benefit of deduction u/s 10A. However, from the materials placed before me during the appeal hearings, it is noticed that the appellant is engaged only in developing software. It has been held in the case of Infosys Technologies Ltd V JCIT (109 TTJ 631) that where an assessee is engaged in the development of computer program it should not be regarded as being engaged in rendering technical services but in the development of computer software. The appellant has relied on the decision in Zylog Systems Ltd (ITA No.1138/Mds/2007) to drive home the point that expenses incurred with staff in a foreign branch do not relate to rendering technical services as it is connected with the object of developing computer software. In view of these decisions, I hold that the AO erred in reducing the expenses mentioned above from the export turnover to restrict the deduction u/s 10A of the Act and direct the AO to allow the appellant’s claim in this regard”.
From the above Para of the ld. CIT(A)’s order, it is seen that he has followed the Tribunal order rendered in the case of M/s Infosys Technologies Ltd Vs JCIT(Supra), but in this case afterwards, the matter travelled up to Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and as per the judgment reported in 34 Taxman.com 91(Kar.), Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has restored the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh decision after examining this aspect as to whether the expenditure incurred in foreign currency was for providing technical services outside India. In the present case, the Bench wanted the ld. AR of the assessee to furnish the agreement/contracts with various buyers as per which the assessee was required to send its employees to the place of customers to find out whether the employees of the assessee company were sent to the place of customers in connection with supply of software to them or whether the employees of the assessee company were sent to the place of customers for rendering technical services and then only the issue can be decided as to whether such expenses incurred in foreign currency for deputing the employees of the assessee company to the place of foreign companies was in connection with supply of computer software or were in connection with rendering technical services but he replied that no such material is readily available. The ld.CIT(A) has also not given any clear finding about this factual aspect and he has passed a cryptic order on this issue by saying that as per the materials placed before him during the appellate proceedings, it is noticed by him that the assessee is 4 IT(TP)A Nos.754 to 756/Bang/2016 engaged only in developing software but this is not coming out as to what was the material placed before him and on what basis, he came to this conclusion. Under these facts and in view of the subsequent judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court cited by the ld. DR of the revenue having been rendered in the case of CIT Vs M/s Infosys Technologies Ltd.(Supra), we feel it proper that this matter should go back to the file of the AO for a fresh decision after examining the factual aspect as to whether the employees of the assessee company were deputed to the place of foreign customers as a part of the agreement with them for supplying computer software, but if it is found that as per the agreement with foreign customer regarding supply of software, the assessee was under no obligation to depute their employees to the place of customer, than it may be a case of rendering technical services outside India which has been accounted for by the assessee as sale of computer software. Hence, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and restore the matter back to the file of AO for fresh decision on this aspect as per above discussion after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ground no.3 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.”
Accordingly, in view of the earlier order as well as order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case as well as decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, the first issue regarding exclusion of the expenses from export turnover as well as total turnover which is covered by the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd. Vs. ACIT 349 ITR 98 and is decided against the revenue.
As regards the second issue, the Tribunal for A.Y. 2007-08 has set aside the same to the record of the Assessing Officer for fresh decision.
Accordingly, by following the order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case (supra), we set aside this issue to the record of the Assessing Officer for fresh decision on the same terms.
5 IT(TP)A Nos.754 to 756/Bang/2016 5. In the result, the appeals of revenue are partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on the 30th Day of Mar.,2017.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- M/S. Birlasoft Limited (Formerly Known As… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…Bangalore14 May 2024Partly Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
The Tribunal held that unabsorbed depreciation should not be reduced from business profits before computing Section 10A deduction. It also directed that expenses reduced from export turnover should also be reduced from t...
- Hsbc Electronic Data Processing India… vs Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-2…Hyderabad27 Mar 2025Partly Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
The Tribunal held that foreign exchange gains, if excluded from export turnover, must also be excluded from total turnover for Section 10A deduction, following Supreme Court precedent. However, hedging gains were remande...
- M/S Dell International Services India Pvt… vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Ltpu…Bangalore7 Aug 2023Partly Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
The Tribunal rejected the ground related to lease deed expenses, finding no evidence of accrual or incurrence in the assessment year. For the issue of short deduction of tax, the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the ...
- Harman Connected Services Corporation India… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…Bangalore27 Jun 2023Partly Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
The Tribunal allowed depreciation at 60% on computer servers, software, and networking equipment, following High Court precedents. It also directed the AO to recompute deduction under Section 10AA based on Supreme Court ...
- M/S. Brightcom Group Limited (Formerly… vs DCIT Circle -17(2), HyderabadHyderabad22 Feb 2023Partly Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
The Tribunal held that the AO erred in treating equity investments as interest-free loans and charging interest. It also directed that expenses excluded from export turnover must also be excluded from total turnover for ...
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
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026