COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2007-08 Computer Sciences Acit, Corporation India Private Company Circle 1(3), Limited, Chennai [Formerly Covansys (India) Private Limited], बनाम/ Unit 13, Block 2, Sdf Buildings, Vs. Madras Export Processing Zone, Tambaram, Chennai (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaacc1351M Assessee By Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. Shri Abhishek Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement

5. The issue has been examined by the Board and it is clarified that freight, telecommunication charges and insurance expenses are to be excluded both from “export turnover” and “total turnover”, while working out deduction admissible under section 10A of the Act to the extent they are attributable to the delivery of articles or things or computer software outside India

ASHA RANI PANDYA,INDORE vs. CPC BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniasha Rani Pandya Dcit/Acit-1(1) 389 1Ad- Scheme No.74C Indore Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aqqpp7081A Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain & Shri Prakash Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28 .06.2024

section 90 read with Rule 128(9) is a procedural law and should not control the claim of FTC. Page 10 of 14 ITANo.176/Ind/2024 Asha Rani Pandya 12. It was further submitted that even in the context of 80IA(7), 10A(5) etc, wherein there is specific provision for disallowance

ACIT-1(1), INDORE vs. FLEXITUFF VENTURES INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, DHAR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Us Assailing The Order Of First-

Section 10A of the Act for the profits earned from SEZ units and remaining profits of other units including SEZ unit were utilized for set off of current and brought forward losses. Respectfully following above judgements, it is held that disallowance of Page 5

BEYONDKEY SYSTEMS P LTD,INDORE vs. THE DY CIT 1(1), INDORE

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Beyondkey Systems Pvt. Dcit 1(1) Ltd. Indore 901A & B, बनाम/ Nrk Business Park, Block B1, Pu4, Vs. Scheme No.54, Vijay Nagar Square, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaccb 7622 G Assessee By Shri Manish Dafaria, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2022 / 16.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

section 10A. Thus, the ITR filed by assessee revealed that the assessee claimed deduction u/s 10B and not u/s 10A. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has treated this as a case of “non-disclosure” and dismissed the identical ground raised by assessee in first-appeal by holding thus: “7.7 In the original proceedings u/s 143(3) the claim of deduction

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S. SHAKTI PUMPS (INDIA) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit (Central)-2, Shakti Pumps (India) Ltd. Indore 226, Shastri Market, बनाम/ M.G. Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aaecs 5027 L Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Vijay Bansal, Ars Date Of Hearing 23/11/2022 / 22.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.04.2023

10A Rs.70089407/- after reallocation of expenses the exempted income has reduced by Rs.41793546/- and remained of Rs.28295861/-The reallocated expenses have reduced from the expenses of DTA unit. Therefore, taxable income has increased by Rs.41793546/-.” 2.26 It has been submitted by the appellant that it had correctly claimed deduction u/s 10AA in accordance with the provisions of section 10AA

AKSHAY ACADEMY,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniakshay Academy Ito, Nfac 32 Kaimaidan Road, Delhi Khasgi Gagicha Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadta8987B Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

5 of 19 ITANo.199/Ind/2024 Akshay Academy be allowed which was also realized by the assesse while making a fresh claim before the AO during the assessment proceedings which is referred by the AO in para 2.2 as under: “2.2 Further, the assessee vide his letter uploaded on 30.1.2021 has stated that Deduction under section 10(23C) (iiiad) is claimed incorrectly

THE ACIT, 3(1), INDORE vs. M/S. KALANI INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result appeals of the revenue & assessee are

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

disallowance made by the AO on account of claim of deduction u/s 10A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the assessee without appreciating the CBDT's Circular No. 07/2012 dated 16/07/2013 and provisions of Act. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in CONo.38/Ind/2019 ( M/s Flexituff International Ltd.): 2.That the Ld CIT (A) erred both

DCIT, 3(1), INDORE vs. M/S. KALANI INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result appeals of the revenue & assessee are

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

disallowance made by the AO on account of claim of deduction u/s 10A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the assessee without appreciating the CBDT's Circular No. 07/2012 dated 16/07/2013 and provisions of Act. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in CONo.38/Ind/2019 ( M/s Flexituff International Ltd.): 2.That the Ld CIT (A) erred both

THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S FLEXITUFF INTERNATIONAL LTD., INDORE

In the result appeals of the revenue & assessee are

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

disallowance made by the AO on account of claim of deduction u/s 10A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the assessee without appreciating the CBDT's Circular No. 07/2012 dated 16/07/2013 and provisions of Act. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in CONo.38/Ind/2019 ( M/s Flexituff International Ltd.): 2.That the Ld CIT (A) erred both

DCIT, 3(1), INDORE vs. M/S. KALANI INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result appeals of the revenue & assessee are

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

disallowance made by the AO on account of claim of deduction u/s 10A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the assessee without appreciating the CBDT's Circular No. 07/2012 dated 16/07/2013 and provisions of Act. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in CONo.38/Ind/2019 ( M/s Flexituff International Ltd.): 2.That the Ld CIT (A) erred both