CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.

349 ITR 98High Court2012#59 most cited

What is CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. authority for?

When computing deduction under Section 10A, if communication or telecommunication expenses are excluded from export turnover, they must also be excluded from total turnover to maintain consistency and apply the ordinary meaning of 'turnover' in context.

818

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. · Section 10A · deduction u/s 10A · export turnover · total turnover · communication expenses · telecommunication expenses · exclusion from turnover · computation of deduction · consistency principle · Karnataka High Court

Also reported as

204 Taxmann 32117 Taxmann.com 100

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 234DSection 234BSection 234CSection 254(2)Section 28Section 10B(4)Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

section 10asection 10companyindiabusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Coco Latex Exports Pvt Ltd

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/24/2012HC Karnataka16 Dec 2015

Bench: The Supreme Court.

Section 3

…OMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, VINEET SARAN J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The questions involved in this appeal are covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Tata Elxi Limited (2012) 349 ITR 98. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, this appeal stands dismissed. 2. However, it is submitted by learned Counsel for the appellants that against the judgment of this Court, an appeal is filed to the Apex Court and is pending consideration. 3. In the event of the Apex Court reversing the judgment of this Court, the…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Cgi Information Systems &

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/22/2013HC Karnataka16 Dec 2015

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

Section 260

…HIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, VINEET SARAN J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The first question involved in this appeal is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Tata Elxi Limited (2012) 349 ITR 98. In view of the first question having been answered in favour of the assessee, learned Counsel for the parties jointly stated that the second question becomes academic in nature and need not be answered. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, this appeal stands dismissed. 2. However, it is submitted by learned Counsel for t…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Kewal Engineering Pvt. Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 803/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri Naresh Saka, Addl.CIT
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

…ing the decision of the Hon’ble held that while computing the deduction u/s 10B of the IT Act, the brought forward loss should not be set off and also held that following the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs Tata Elxsi Ltd. 349 ITR 98, that the freight charges should be reduced from the export turnover as well as total turnover while computing the deduction u/s 10B of the IT Act, 1961. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal before us. ITA No.803 (B)/2015 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The iss…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Infosys Bpo Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed and the CO by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1004/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2006-07

For Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…renewing the same is to be construed as only revenue expenditure do not call for interference by this court.” 13. Grounds No.4 & 5 read as follows:- “4. The CIT(A) erred in following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Limited 349 ITR 98 and in directing the AO to exclude telecommunication expenses from the total turnover also while computing the deduction u/s 10A of the I.T. Act without appreciating the fact that there is no provision in section 10A that such expenses should be reduced from the total turnover also, as clause (iv) of the explanation to section 10A provides that su…

Sami Labs Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1358/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Cherian K. Baby, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 92C

…rnover a part of the export turnover which has not been considered in the numerator. It was submitted that the computation done by the assessee is in accordance with the decisions of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. (349 ITR 98) and CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (350 ITR 65) wherein it was held that determination of total turnover should be by adopting the export turnover and adding the domestic or other turnover to it and expenses deducted in determination of export turnover cannot be added back while determining the total turnover. It was also held by the High Co…

Pr.Commissioner of vs. M/S. Teleradiology

ITA/385/2015HC Karnataka04 Dec 2015

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

Section 10ASection 37(1)

…ture which expressly falls in Sections 30 to 36?” 3. Learned counsel for the appellants has fairly stated that the first two questions are covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Tata Elxsi Limited (2012) 349 ITR 98. As such, no substantial question of law arises for determination by this Court in the first two questions. 4. As regards the third question, the findings of fact have been recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), as well as the Tribunal, that the expenditure of Rs.17,43,738/-, which is disputed, was incurred towards rep…

M/S Arm Embedded Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1161/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri I.P.S. Bindra, CIT(DR-I)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…dia and in the alternative, if the same is reduced from export turnover it should also be reduced from total turnover. On the alternative submission, reliance was placed upon the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd [2012] 349 ITR 98 (Kar). In this judgment, it has been held that whatever is excluded from the export turnover, has also to be excluded from the total turnover. Accordingly, we direct the AO to recompute the deduction u/s. 10A in respect of travel expenses and telecommunication charges by reducing the same from total turnover also. 36. In the result, the appeal…

M/S. Arm Embedded Technologies Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1112/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri I.P.S. Bindra, CIT(DR-I)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…dia and in the alternative, if the same is reduced from export turnover it should also be reduced from total turnover. On the alternative submission, reliance was placed upon the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd [2012] 349 ITR 98 (Kar). In this judgment, it has been held that whatever is excluded from the export turnover, has also to be excluded from the total turnover. Accordingly, we direct the AO to recompute the deduction u/s. 10A in respect of travel expenses and telecommunication charges by reducing the same from total turnover also. 36. In the result, the appeal…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Mphasis Software & Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

Appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1032/BANG/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijaypal Raoi.T.A No.1032/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -12(1), Bangalore .. Appellant V. Mphasis Software & Services (India) P. Ltd, 6Th Floor, A Block, Bagmane Techpark, Byrasandra, C. V. Raman Nagar, Bangalore 560 093 .. Respondent Pan : Aaccm5986G Assessee By : Shri. B. R. Sudheendra, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sanjay Kumar, Cit- Iii Heard On : 24.11.2015 Pronounced On :27.11.2015 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

For Appellant: Shri. B. R. Sudheendra, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar, CIT- III
Section 10ASection 10B

…me-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short), after ITA.1032/Bang/2015 Page - 2 reducing telecommunication charges from export turnover as well as the total turnover relying on the judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd (349 ITR 98). 02. Assessee which is a company engaged in the development of software had claimed deduction u/s.10B of the Act. AO excluded from the export turnover the telecommunication expenditure while working out the eligible deduction under the said section. However, the AO did not deduct the said amount from the total turnover while working out the dedu…

The Commissioner of Income -Tax vs. M/S Amazone Development

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/422/2015HC Karnataka24 Nov 2015

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

Section 260

…appellants as well as Sri P.Dinesh, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record. 2. The questions involved in this appeal are covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax –vs- Tata Elxi Limited (2012) 349 ITR 98. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, this appeal stands dismissed. 3. However, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that against the judgment of this 3 Court, an appeal is filed to the Apex Court and is pending consideration. 4. In the event of the Apex Court reversing the judgment of this Court,…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Igate Global Solutions Ltd

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/490/2013HC Karnataka20 Nov 2015

Bench: VINEET SARAN,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR

Section 10ASection 260(1)(A)Section 260ASection 92C

…3 5. However, insofar as the first question of law is concerned, learned counsel for the parties have stated that the said question is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax –vs- Tata Elxsi Limited (2012) 349 ITR 98 wherein the question has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. As such, the first question is accordingly answered in favour of the assesee and against the Revenue. 6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that against the judgment of this Court in the case of Tata Elxsi (supra), an appeal is f…

Lisle Technology Partners Private Limited

COP/114/2015HC Karnataka13 Nov 2015

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR

Section 260

…ourt in the case of HCL Technologies Ltd. (supra), is quoted below for ready reference:- “17. The similar nature of controversy, akin this case, arose before the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [2012] 204 Taxman 321/17/taxman.com 100/349 ITR 98. The issue before the Karnataka High Court was whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that while computing relief under Section 10A of the IT Act, the amount of communication expenses should be excluded from the total turnover if the same are reduced from the export turnover? While giving the answer to the issue, the High Court, inte…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ikanos Communication India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 137/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijaypal Raoi.T(It).A No.137/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -3(1)(1), Bangalore .. Appellant V. M/S. Ikanos Communication India Pvt. Ltd, 3Rd Floor, Corporate Miller, No.332/1, Thimmaiah Road, Vasanthnagar, Bangalore 560 052 .. Respondent Pan : Aabci1928F Cross Objection No.109/Bang/2015 (In I.T(It).A No.137/Bang/2015) (Assessment Year : 2010-11) (By The Assessee) Assessee By : Shri. Ajit Tolani, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sanjay Kumar, Cit - Iii Heard On : 27.10.2015 Pronounced On : 10.11.2015 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George: These Are Appeal & Cross Objection By The Revenue & Assessee Respectively, Directed Against An Assessment Made By The Ao U/S.143(3) Of It(Tp)A.137/Bang/2015 & Co.109/Bang/2015 Page - 2

For Appellant: Shri. Ajit Tolani, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar, CIT - III
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C

…directed exclusion of expenditure deducted from export turnover, from total turnover also while computing eligible deduction u/s.10A of the Act. We find that CIT (A) had relied on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd (349 ITR 98), wherein it was held unequivocally by their Lordships that items excluded from export turnover had to be excluded from the total turnover also while working out the eligible deduction. Since the CIT (A) had followed the judgment of jurisdictional High Court, just for a reason that an SLP has been filed before the Supreme Court, we cannot deviate…

Ge Medical Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 328/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T.(T.P.) A. No.328/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/S. Ge Medical Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Since Merged With Wipro Ge Healthcare Circle 7(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd.) Plot Nos.3, 3A & 4, Kadugodi Indl. Area, Bangalore-560 067 Pan Aaacg 7655G Appellant Respondent. I.T.(T.P.) A. No.224/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) (By Revenue) Assessee By : Shri K.R. Pradeep, C.A. Revenue By : Shri G.R. Reddy, Cit-I (D.R.) Date Of Hearing : 9.9.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 4.11.2015. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : These Are Cross Appeals By Revenue & The Assessee, Preferred Against The Final Order Of Assessment Dt.30.12.2014 Passed Under Section 143(3) Rws 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short 'The Act') In Pursuance To The Directions Dt.28.11.2014 Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Drp’) Under Section 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Facts Of The Case, Briefly, Are As Under :-

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT-I (D.R.)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 154Section 92C

…ve decided the comparability of these companies on the basis of specific facts brought on record by the TPO in the case of the assessee. 7. The DRP erred in directing the Assessing Officer to follow the ratio of the Hon'ble Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd 349 ITR 98 and exclude Rs.57,93,554 being the expenses incurred in foreign exchange on travel and Rs.1,085,000 insurance expenses respectively form the total turnover also while computing the deduction under Section 10A of the IT Act as the decision of the High Court is binding, without appreciating the fact that there is no provision in section 10A that suc…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Makino India Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2004-05 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 935/BANG/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kaleemulla Khan, JCIT (D.R)
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…er to exclude certain expenses from both export turnover as well as total turnover while computing the eligible deduction under Section 10A of the Act and in following the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd. reported in 349 ITR 98 (Kar.), while doing so, as the said decision has not been accepted by the Department and the SLP in the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court. 4.1 In the meanwhile, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act and reopened the assessment for Assessment Year 2004-05 by issue of notice under Section 148 of the A…

Makino India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ACIT

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2004-05 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1016/BANG/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kaleemulla Khan, JCIT (D.R)
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…er to exclude certain expenses from both export turnover as well as total turnover while computing the eligible deduction under Section 10A of the Act and in following the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd. reported in 349 ITR 98 (Kar.), while doing so, as the said decision has not been accepted by the Department and the SLP in the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court. 4.1 In the meanwhile, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act and reopened the assessment for Assessment Year 2004-05 by issue of notice under Section 148 of the A…

DCIT vs. M/S E4E Business Solutions P. Ltd

ITA 1765/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T. (T.P.) A. No.1765/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 11(3), Bangalore. …. Appellant. Vs. M/S. E4E Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly I-Seva Systems Pvt. Ltd.) Maruthi Chambers, 17/4C, Rupena Agrahara, Hosur Road, Bangalore-560 068. ….. Respondent. I.T.(T.P.) A. No.1783/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year 2008-09) (By Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, C.A. Revenue By : Smt. Chandana Ramachandran, Cit-Iii (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 22.09.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 4.11.2015. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : These Are Cross Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By Revenue, Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Bangalore Dt.8.10.2013 For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, Briefly, Are As Under :-

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Chandana Ramachandran, CIT-III (D.R)
Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…rs P. Ltd. 20 ITR (Trib) 138; (ii) to apply the turnover filter of Rs.1 Crore to 200 Crores and to exclude companies having turnover in excess of Rs.200 Crores; (iii) to apply the ratio of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT V Tata Elxsi Ltd. (349 ITR 98). 5 IT(T.P) A Nos.1765 & 1783/Bang/2013 3. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals) – IV, Bangalore dt.8.10.2013 for Assessment Year 2008-09, both the assessee and revenue has preferred appeals before the Tribunal raising the following grounds :- 3.1 IT(TP)A No.1783/Bang/2013 – Assessee's appeal for A.Y. 2008-09. “ Grounds of Apepal on Transfe…

M/S. Support.Com India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1340/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT-I(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ls have held that if some expenses, for any reason, are excluded in arriving at the ‘export turnover’, the same should also be reduced from ‘total turnover’.” IT(TP)A No.1340/Bang/2010 Page 25 of 25 26. The Hon’ble High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd., 349 ITR 98 (Karn), has held that whatever is excluded from the export turnover, has also to be excluded from the total turnover. Respectfully following this decision, we hold that the expenditure of telecommunication charges and foreign exchange loss be excluded from the total turnover also in the process of computation of deduction u/s. 10A. 27. Ground No.…

M/S Ocwen Financial Solution Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1318/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Manoj M Shenoy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234B

…the assessee as well as the learned Departmental Representative and considered the relevant material on record. At the outset, we note that this issue is now covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACIT vs. Tata Elxsi (349 ITR 98). The learned AR of the assessee has fairly conceded that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi (supra), this amount is required to be excluded both from the export turnover as well as total turnover. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Elxsi (supra) has held as under: “Fr…

M/S. Verisign Services India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1404/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Kishore Prasad, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri I.P.S.Bindra, CIT-DR-I
Section 143(3)Section 92C(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘A’, BANGALORE BEFORE SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.1404(B)/2010 (Assessment year : 2006-07) M/s VeriSign Services India Pvt.Ltd., Summit No.6/B, 7th Main, 3rd Block, 80 Feet Road, Koramangala, Bangalore 560-034 Appellant PAN No.AAACL8712F Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-12(5), 14/3, 5th Floor, R.P.Bhavan, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore-560 001 Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pravin Kishore Prasad, Advocate Revenue by : Shri I.P.S.Bindra, CIT-DR-I Date of hearing : 14-10-2015…