THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs M/S BUSINESS PROCESS OUTSOURCING INDIA PVT LTD

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2015 PRESENT THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 543/2013 BETWEEN:

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

C.R. BUILDING,

QUEENS ROAD,

BANGALORE

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER,

WARD-11(1),

RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN,

NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,

BANGALORE.

.. APPELLANTS (BY SRI K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S. BUSINESS PROCESS OUTSOURCING INDIA PVT. LTD., SALARPURIA HALLMARK, GROUND FLOOR, A BLOCK, 15/3,16, KADUBEESANAHALLI,

2 OUTER RING ROAD, BANGALORE-560 087.

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI K.R. VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE) …

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.06.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO. 602/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004- 05 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE I.T.A.T. BANGALORE IN IT(T.P.)A NO.602/BANG/2011, DATED 07.06.2013 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), BANGALORE.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, N. KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The revenue has preferred this appeal against granting relief to the assessee. The substantial question of law raised in this appeal is as under:

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances and in law the Tribunal is

3 correct in holding that the expenditure incurred in foreign currency excluded from export turnover has to be excluded from total turnover when there is no provision in section 10A to exclude from total turnover?”

This Court had an occasion to consider the substantial question of law, in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER v. TATA ELXSI LTD reported in (2012) 349 ITR 98 (Karn), wherein, after referring to the various provisions of law and the judgments of various Courts, the said substantial question of law has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Accordingly, as the said substantial question of law is already answered by this Court, no case for admission is made out.

4 3. However, it is submitted that the revenue has preferred an appeal to the Apex Court against the judgment of this Court, which is pending consideration.

In the event of the revenue succeeding in the appeal before the Apex Court then the assessing authority shall pass consequential order in terms of Section 260(1A) of the Income Tax Act 1961.

With the aforesaid observation, appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sbs*

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BUSINESS PROCESS OUTSOURCING INDIA PVT LTD