Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.

249 ITR 50Reported decision#15496 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

contemporaneous dataeconomic adjustmentsection 92asafe harbour rulessection 92b(1)safe harbourcomparable uncontrolled price methodsection 92(1)section 38section 244management feestransfer pricing order

Judgments citing Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.

M/S UL INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 655/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.574/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kalyani Platina – Block I, 3Rd Floor, 24, Epip Circle -7(1)(1), Zone, Phase – 2Nd, Whitefield, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.378/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Circle -7(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 066. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Appellant Respondent C.O.No.127/Bang/2015 (In It(Tp)A No.378/Bang/2015) Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Circle -7(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 066. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Cross Objector Respondent It(Tp)A No.655/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 066. Circle -7(1)(1), Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92C

…arges nor the travel expenses ought to be reduced from its export turnover, it accepted its alternate contention that they should also be reduced from its total turnover by following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.249 ITR 50 (Karn) and others. Accordingly, it directed the AO to exclude the above expenses from both its export and total turnovers while computing the deduction allowable under Section 10A. Thus, on the basis of the DRP’s above directions, the disallowance under Section 10A ought to be allowed as claimed by the Assessee but the AO did not do so in the fina…

UL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 574/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.574/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kalyani Platina – Block I, 3Rd Floor, 24, Epip Circle -7(1)(1), Zone, Phase – 2Nd, Whitefield, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.378/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Circle -7(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 066. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Appellant Respondent C.O.No.127/Bang/2015 (In It(Tp)A No.378/Bang/2015) Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Circle -7(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 066. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Cross Objector Respondent It(Tp)A No.655/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 066. Circle -7(1)(1), Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92C

…arges nor the travel expenses ought to be reduced from its export turnover, it accepted its alternate contention that they should also be reduced from its total turnover by following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.249 ITR 50 (Karn) and others. Accordingly, it directed the AO to exclude the above expenses from both its export and total turnovers while computing the deduction allowable under Section 10A. Thus, on the basis of the DRP’s above directions, the disallowance under Section 10A ought to be allowed as claimed by the Assessee but the AO did not do so in the fina…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S U.L. INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 378/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.574/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kalyani Platina – Block I, 3Rd Floor, 24, Epip Circle -7(1)(1), Zone, Phase – 2Nd, Whitefield, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.378/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Circle -7(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 066. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Appellant Respondent C.O.No.127/Bang/2015 (In It(Tp)A No.378/Bang/2015) Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Circle -7(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 066. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Cross Objector Respondent It(Tp)A No.655/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ul India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 066. Circle -7(1)(1), Pan : Aaacu 2468 F Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92C

…arges nor the travel expenses ought to be reduced from its export turnover, it accepted its alternate contention that they should also be reduced from its total turnover by following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.249 ITR 50 (Karn) and others. Accordingly, it directed the AO to exclude the above expenses from both its export and total turnovers while computing the deduction allowable under Section 10A. Thus, on the basis of the DRP’s above directions, the disallowance under Section 10A ought to be allowed as claimed by the Assessee but the AO did not do so in the fina…

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 639/BANG/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2021

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.637/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Dell International Services The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax (Ltu), 12/1A, 12/2A, 13/1A, Diyashree Bengaluru. Greens, Challaghatta Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru-560 071. Pan : Aaach 1925 Q Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.639/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dell International Services Income Tax (Ltu), India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 071. Pan : Aaach 1925 Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri. Muzzafar Hussain, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore Assessee By : Shri. T.Suryanarayana, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: It(Tp)A No.637/Bang/2016 Is An Appeal By The Assessee While It(Tp)A No.639/Bang/2016 Is An Appeal By The Revenue. Both The Appeals Are Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 29.01.2016 Of Jcit, Ltu Unit, Bengaluru, Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called The ‘Act’) In Relation To Assessment Year 2010-11. It(Tp)A Nos.637 & 639/Bang/2016 Page 2 Of 21

For Appellant: Shri. T.Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muzzafar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.637/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s. Dell International Services The Joint Commissioner of Vs. India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax (LTU), 12/1A, 12/2A, 13/1A, Diyashree Bengaluru. Greens, Challaghatta Village, varthur Hobli, Bengaluru-560 071. PAN : AAACH 1925 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.639/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Dell International Services Income Tax (LTU), India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560…

M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 637/BANG/2016[20101-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2021

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.637/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Dell International Services The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax (Ltu), 12/1A, 12/2A, 13/1A, Diyashree Bengaluru. Greens, Challaghatta Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru-560 071. Pan : Aaach 1925 Q Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.639/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dell International Services Income Tax (Ltu), India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 071. Pan : Aaach 1925 Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri. Muzzafar Hussain, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore Assessee By : Shri. T.Suryanarayana, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: It(Tp)A No.637/Bang/2016 Is An Appeal By The Assessee While It(Tp)A No.639/Bang/2016 Is An Appeal By The Revenue. Both The Appeals Are Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 29.01.2016 Of Jcit, Ltu Unit, Bengaluru, Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called The ‘Act’) In Relation To Assessment Year 2010-11. It(Tp)A Nos.637 & 639/Bang/2016 Page 2 Of 21

For Appellant: Shri. T.Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muzzafar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.637/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s. Dell International Services The Joint Commissioner of Vs. India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax (LTU), 12/1A, 12/2A, 13/1A, Diyashree Bengaluru. Greens, Challaghatta Village, varthur Hobli, Bengaluru-560 071. PAN : AAACH 1925 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.639/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Dell International Services Income Tax (LTU), India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S INDEPENDENT TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1086/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Pradeep, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sreenandini Das, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92Section 92C

…grounds of appeal is with regard to telecommunication expenses and foreign currency expenses reduced from the total turnover without reducing the same from the export turnover. The decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd. 249 ITR 50 (Karn.) on this issue holding that whatever is excluded from the total turnover while computing deduction u/s. 10A of the Act has since been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. HCL Technologies Ltd. in Civil Appeal No.8489-98490 of 2013 & Ors. dated 24.04.2018. In view of the above, there is no merit in ground Nos. 9 to 12…

Karnataka in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. (249 ITR 50) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax