PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 V. M/S. SUZLON WIND INTERNATIONAL LTD.,

ITA/677/2015

AI Insights

The case involves the Income Tax Department as appellants and Suzlon Wind International Ltd. as the respondent. The core issue was the computation of deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, specifically whether certain expenses excluded by the assessing authority should be excluded from both total turnover and export turnover. The appellants argued that the exclusion should only apply to export turnover, referencing the definitions in Section 10A. The Tribunal had previously ruled in favor of the respondent, leading to this appeal by the Revenue. The High Court's decision referenced the precedent set in Tata Elxsi Ltd., which had similar circumstances.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 698991 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHYTHANYA
• Assessee Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Keywords: Deduction under Section 10A; Export Turnover; Income Tax; Total Turnover
• Section: 10A; 260-A

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 2016 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA ITA NO. 677/2015 BETWEEN: 1. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(2), BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (By SRI. E. I. SANMATHI, ADV.) AND: M/S. SUZLON WIND INTERNATIONAL LTD., 201, 2ND FLOOR, GOLD TOWERS, RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 025, PAN:AAKCS4713M. ... RESPONDENT (BY CHYTHANYA K.K., ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 02.06.2015 PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘B’ BENCH, BENGALURU, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO.ITA NO.52/BANG/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2 THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T The order of the Assessing Officer at Annexure-C is produced upto page-4 which includes the completion of the assessment order. Hence, page Nos.5 and 6 may not be required. In the circumstances, the office objection is dispensed with. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants-Revenue submits that the matter is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Limited (349 ITR 98). Hence, we find it appropriate to take up the matter for further consideration. 3. The appellants-Revenue has preferred the present appeal by raising the following substantial questions of law: “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the expenses excluded by assessing authority are to be 3 excluded from total turnover as well as from export turnover for computation of deduction u/s.10A whereas such exclusion is permitted to arrive at export turnover only as per the definitions given in Sec.10A of the IT Act and total turnover has not been defined in the Section? 2. Whether, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the deduction under Section 10A should be computed in the above manner 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?” 4. We have heard Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr.Chythanya K.K., learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly concedes that the issues are already covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Tata Elxsi (supra). However, he submitted that the appellants-Revenue has carried the 4 matter before the Apex Court and hence, it may not be said the issues are concluded. 6. In our view, as on today, since the matter is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Tata Elxsi (supra), no substantial question of law would arise for consideration. However, it is clarified that in the event the Apex Court takes a different view, the appellants-Revenue may be at liberty to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Subject to the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed. SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE TL "