Income Tax And Another v. Tata Elxsit Ltd.reported At,(2012) 349 Itr 98 (Karn

IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATEBD THIS THE 1[‘T]DAY OF JUNE 20106) PRESENT THR HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THR HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.SRBBNIVASKH GOWDA ITA NO.191/2016 BETWEEN 1.|PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 Cc. R. BUILDINGS QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE-560 O0O1. D |DBRPUTY COMMISSIONBR OF [INCOMECIRCLE-12(5)_CIRCLE-12(5)_ BANGALORE. _. APPKRHLLANTS (BY SRI. E.].SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND M/S. UNISYS INDIA PVT LTD|() 5 FLOOR, BLOCK, “WRAP” SJR PARK, WHITE FIELD AREA, NO.1314&15, K.R.PURAM, |BANGALORE-560 066| _. RESPONDENT THIS [TA IS FILED UNDER SEKC.260-A OF INCOMETAXACT1961,ARISINGOUTOF|ORDERDATED:24/09/2015—PASSBHBIN-ITANO.691/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR.A2OO8-OYPRAYINGTO.DEBCIDETHERRFORBGOINGQUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS|OF LAW AS MAY BR FORMULATBD BY THR HON'BLE|COURTASDHRBME]BITANT)SETASIDETHE|APPELLATE ORDER DATED: 24/09/2015 PASSED BY)THRITAT,‘A’BENCH,|BENGALURU,IN|APPEAL|PROCBRBDINGSNO..ITANO.691/BANG/2013FOR.ASSESSEMENT YEAR 2008-09, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THISAPPKHAL AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHBR RELIEF ASDEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,JAYANT PATEL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMBNT The appellant-Revenue has preferred the presentappeal by raising the following substantial question oflaw: “WhetherOT]the.factsandin.thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal isright in law in directing the assessingauthority to not to exclude the expensesincurred in foreign currency from exportturnover for the purpose of computation ofdeduction under section 10A of the Act inthe case of the assessee against theprovisions of the Act and when thejudgment of this Hon’ble High Court in thecase of CIT V/s. Tata Elxsi has not reachedfinality?” 2. The learned Counsel for the appellants-Revenue has fairly conceded that the matter is covered by thedecision of this Court in the case of.Commissioner of Income Tax And Another Vs. Tata Elxsit Ltd.reported at,(2012) 349 ITR 98 (Karn.) 3. When the matter is already covered by theabove referred decision of this Court, we do not find thatany substantial question of law would arise forconsideration. ��' � )���37F3&�823�455346�A;�>A;GA;;3>�� ������ �!�������� �!��