THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CENTURY LINK TECHNOLOGIES

PDF · subscribers
ITA/620/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01045616201517 March 2016Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial questions of law were already covered by its previous decision in CIT vs. Tata Elxsi Ltd. Therefore, no new substantial questions of law arose for consideration.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that confirmed the Commissioner's order regarding deduction under Section 10A. The appeal raised questions about the computation of this deduction and the exclusion of foreign currency expenditure.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT correctly applied the deduction under Section 10A based on existing High Court judgments, even though SLPs were pending before the Supreme Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2016

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA INCOME TAX APPEAL No.620/2015

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1) 2ND FLOOR,BMTC BUS DEPOT, 80 FEET ROAD,KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 095

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND:

M/S CENTURY LINK TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT.LTD., SALARPURIA HALL MARK, BLOCK B, I & II FLOORS, 2B WING,

2 SURVEY NO.15/3 & 16, KADUBEESANAHALLI,VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 087 PAN:AAHCS 7683M

...RESPONDENT

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:26/05/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.39/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 39/BANG/2015 DATED:26/05/2015 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The Revenue has preferred the present appeal by raising following substantial questions of law:

“1. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the deduction under Section 10A should be computed following the judgment of this Hon’ble Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Elxsi Ltd., which has not become final since the same has not been accepted by the Department and SLPs filed by the Revenue on this issue are pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court?

2.

Whether, the Tribunal is justified in directing the assessing officer to exclude the expenditure incurred in foreign currency both from the export turnover and the total turnover when there is no provision in Section 10A which requires the concerned expenses, which are required to be reduced

4 from the export turnover as per clause (iv) of the Explanation to Section 10A to be reduced from the total turnover also?”

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant Mr.K.V.Arvind fairly concedes that questions are already covered by the decision of this Court in CIT vs. Tata Elexsi reported in 349 ITR 98. However, it was submitted that, the matter has been carried before the Apex Court in SLP.

3.

In view of the above, we do not find any substantial questions of law would arise for consideration. In the event, Apex Court takes a different view, the appropriate proceedings may be initiated in accordance with law.

4.

Subject to aforesaid observation, the appeal is dismissed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

Sk/-

More judgments on Section 10A

All 2,147 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →