High Court dismisses Revenue's appeal on forex gain/loss treatment in operating income for AY 2009-10

The Revenue's appeal challenging the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order for the Assessment Year 2009-10 regarding the treatment of forex gain/loss in the taxpayer's operating income was dismissed by the High Court. The court held that the foreign exchange gain/loss should be included in operating revenues for calculating the operating margin. It emphasized appeals should involve substantial legal questions, not just factual disputes. As no substantial question of law was found, the appeal was dismissed with no costs awarded, setting a precedent for maintaining high standards in appeals, whether filed by Revenue or Assessees.

---

---

Issues:
1. Appeal filed by Revenue challenging the Order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the Assessment Year 2009-10.

Analysis:
The appeal raised substantial questions of law related to the treatment of forex gain or loss in the operating income/loss of the taxpayer. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments of both parties, held that the foreign exchange gain/loss arising from software development services should be included in the operating revenues for calculating the operating margin of the assessee. This decision was supported by previous tribunal rulings. The controversy was deemed settled based on a previous court decision unless the Tribunal's finding was ex facie perverse, rendering the appeal not maintainable under Section 260-A of the Act.

The court emphasized that appeals should involve substantial questions of law, such as interpretation of DTAA provisions or BEPS issues, rather than disputes over comparables or filters for determining comparables. The court clarified that dissatisfaction with the Tribunal's factual findings alone is insufficient to invoke Section 260-A. Consequently, the court found no substantial question of law in the present case and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, stating that the same standards apply even if appeals are filed by the Assessees. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs, concluding the judgment.

---