DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S CRMIT SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

This appeal is preferred by the revenue against the order of CIT(A) on solitary ground that CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts to allow the incidental expenses to be reduced from both export turnover and total turnover. In this regard, the learned counsel for the assessee had invited attention to the order of CIT(A) with the submission that CIT(A) has decided the issue relating to computation of deduction under section 10A of the act in the light of judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd., Vs. ACIT 349 ITR 98 and directed the AO to exclude certain expenses which were excluded from export turnover, from the total turnover also.

The learned DR simply placed reliance upon the order of the AO.

Having carefully examined the order of the lower authorities, we find that CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue in the light of judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd., Vs. ACIT 349 ITR 98 (supra). Therefore, there is no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). For the sake of reference, we extract the relevant para of the CIT(A) as under:

Since CIT(A) has decided the issue in the light of judgment of Jurisdictional High Court, we find no infirmity therein.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.