Ita/1131/2008 Of M/S Tata Elxsi Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREDATED THLS THE 20 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014 PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N KUMARAND|THE HON’‘BLE MR.JUSTICE B MANOHAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.LL31L QF 2ZO0 BEIWEEN! M/S TATA ELXSI LIMITED)ITPB ROAD, HOODY|WHITEFILELD ROADBANGALORE - 560048REP BY RAMADAS KAMATHCORPORATE MANAGER -—- FINANCE ...APPELLAN [ (BY SRI: CHYTHANYA K K, ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAXCIRCLE 12(4)BANGALORE.~. RESPONDENT (BY SRI: JEEVAN J NEERALGI, ADVOCATE) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A|OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED|17.09.2008|PASSEDIN|ITANO.264/BANG/2008AND|TTANO.265/BANG/2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-2004|AND 2004-2005, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL|QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND TO ALLOW THE}APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX)APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE, IN ITA NO.264/BANG/2008|AND ITA NO.265/BANG/2008 DATED 12.09.2008. THIS INCOME TAK APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARINGTHIS DAY,N.KUMAR, J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2D JUDGMENT Sri.Jeevan J. Neeralgi, learned counsel for the revenue,takes notice for the respondent. 2. The assessee has preferred this appeal against theOrder passed by the Tribunal holding that the expenses|incurred towards technical expenses is to be deducted out of|the profits and gains earned from the export turnover. 3. The substantial questions of law framed in thisappeal on 17.12.2008 are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the casewhetner the Appellate TribDunal is rignt in noldingtnat the appellant is rendering ‘tecnnical services’outside India in connection with tne export ofcomputer software?| 2. On the facts and circumstances of the casewhnetnerthe.AppellateTripunal|ISerredinconfirming the order of the Assessing Authority that.the marketing expenses incurred py the appellant.outside India to prospect its business also form part.Of|‘exportturnover’WItnintnemeaning.of| Explanation 2 to Section 10-A of the Income Tax.Act, 1961?” 4. Similar questions of law arouse for considerationbefore this Court In the case of|The Commissioner ofIncome Tax & another v/s. Motor Industries Co. Ltd. in| I.T.A. No.7/76/2007 & connected casesaecidedq o13,6,2014, wherein the substantial questions of law were|answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.Following the said judgment, the substantial questions of law.raised in this appeal should also be answered in favour of theassessee and against the revenue. Accordingly, the appeal is |aliowed. Impugned order passed by the authorities are|hereby set aside. The assessee is entitled to the benefit. | 5. Sri.Jeevan J. Neeralgi, |earned counsel, is permittedto file Memo of Appearance within four weeks. Sd/-JUDGE KM. Sd/-JUDGE