M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED., ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, following a coordinate bench decision and Supreme Court pronouncements, held that the deduction under Section 10AA should be calculated with reference to 'gross profits and gains' and not 'income' after allocation of common expenses. The matter was remitted to the AO for fresh assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an IT company, claimed deduction under Section 10AA for its SEZ units without allocating common corporate expenses. The Assessing Officer allocated these expenses based on turnover, reducing the deduction, a view confirmed by the NFAC.
What were the issues?
Whether common corporate expenses should be allocated to SEZ units for calculating Section 10AA deduction, and if so, on what basis. The interpretation of 'profits and gains' for the purpose of Section 10AA deduction.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(28)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.
- National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT5,834 citing229 ITR 383 · 1998 · SC
- Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT2,943 citing243 ITR 83 · 2000 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.290 citing391 ITR 274 · 2017 · SC · Read judgment
- Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT245 citing2 SCC 644 · 1978 · Read judgment
- Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India229 citing155 ITR 120 · 1985 · SC
- Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. DCIT62 citing325 ITR 102 · 2010 · HC
- CIT v. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd.53 citing157 ITR 762 · 2014 · HC
- CIT v. Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd.46 citing57 ITR 306 · 1965 · SC
- Distributor (Baroda) Private Limited v. Union of India35 citing22 Taxmann 49 · 1985 · SC
- P.K. Badiani v. CIT27 citing105 ITR 642 · 1976 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Kotagiri Industrial Co-operative Tea Factory Ltd.25 citing224 ITR 604 · 1997 · SC
- Cloth Traders (P.) Ltd. v. Addl CIT22 citing118 ITR 243 · 1979 · SC
- Cloth Traders (P) Ltd. v. CIT16 citing3 SCC 538 · 1986
- H.H. Sir Rama Verma v. CIT15 citing205 ITR 433 · 1994 · SC
- Plastiblends India Ltd. v. ACIT15 citing318 ITR 352 · 2009
- Western States Trading (P) Ltd. v. CIT14 citing80 ITR 21 · 1971 · SC · Read judgment
- 80 ITR 21 9. 10. CIT v. Shrikishan Chandmal (Madhya Pradesh HC) 60 ITR 303 11. CIT v. R. Dalmia (Delhi HC)10 citing162 ITR 373 · 1986 · SC
- Brooke Bond and Co. Ltd. v. CIT (SC) 162 ITR 373 13. Addl.CIT v. Solar Chemical Pvt. Ltd. (Allahabad HC)7 citing259 ITR 26 · 2003 · HC
- Motilal 4. Pesticides (I) (P.) Ltd. v. CIT6 citing243 ITR 26 · 2000 · SC
- 1. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. DCIT (Bom. HC)5 citing398 ITR 568 · 2017 · SC
- Trading Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT (SC)4 citing60 ITR 303
- Trading Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT (SC) 80 ITR 21 9. 10. CIT v. Shrikishan Chandmal (Madhya Pradesh HC)4 citing96 ITR 463 · 1974
- 69 ITR 2783 citing69 ITR 278
- CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. (SC) 391 ITR 274 3. Kilburn Properties Limited v. CIT (Kolkata HC)3 citing18 ITR 762
- ITR 303 11. CIT v. R. Dalmia (Delhi HC) 96 ITR 463 12. Brooke Bond and Co. Ltd. v. CIT (SC)3 citing190 ITR 216
- 3 citing
- Plastiblends India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, Mumbai (SC) 398 ITR 568 2. CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. (SC)3 citing17 ITR 134
- Properties Limited v. CIT (Kolkata HC) 17 ITR 134 4. Ezra Propritary Estate Ltd. v. CIT (Kolkata HC)3 citing33 ITR 341
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K. & SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI
PER BENCH: These appeals by assessee are directed against different orders of NFAC for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21. The common ground in all these appeals is with regard to allocation of common Corporate expenditure between undertaking entitled for exemption u/s 10AA & Non- 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) resulting in reduction of deduction u/s 10AA of the Act at Rs.95,84,407/-, Rs.1,09,08,930/- & Rs.12,69,96,527/- for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21 respectively.
The assessee is an Information Technology company, has operations from
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 10AA
- Quantium Analytics Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 16(3), HyderabadITA 1336/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Ab Knowledge Systems, Pune vs DCIT, PuneITA 92/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- ACIT-Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore vs Eygbs(India) Private Limited, BangaloreITA 1886/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- ACIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs Galaxy Surfactants Limited, MumbaiITA 6984/MUM/2025[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2011-2012
- Genpact Infrastructure (Hyderabad) Pvt… vs ITO, New DelhiITA 2055/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2009-10
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026