2012 (5) TMI 671

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... That the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'CIT(A)') under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') is perverse, erroneous on facts and bad in law. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Ld. ACIT (hereinafter referred to as 'Assessing Officer' or 'AO') of reducing the leased line expenses of Rs. 2,05,27,551 and freight expenses of Rs. 1,113,205 from the 'Export Turnover' while computing the deduction u/s 10A and l0B of the Act. 3.1 Without prejudice to above, even assuming but not admitting that the above leased line charges and freight expenses are to be reduced from 'export turno....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essed u/s. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" in short"]. Later on the case was selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer while framing the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act reduced the communication expenses of Q 2,05,27,551 attributable to the delivery of software outside India from export turnover for the purposes of computing deduction u/s. 10A. The AO also reduced the freight expenses of Q 11,13,205 attributable to the delivery of software outside India from the export turnover for the purposes of computing deduction u/s. 10B of the Act. 5. The assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A), who confirmed the action of the AO by observing that section 80HHC and 80HHE are contextually different....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2011 in the case of CIT v. M/s. Tata Elxsi Ltd. in ITA No.70/2009 & Ors., the relevant findings have been given in paras 2 & 3 of the aforesaid referred to order dated 02.11.2011, which read as under:- "2. The said question was answered by this Court in the case of the Commissioner of Income-Tax and another vs. M/s. Tata Elxsi Ltd., in ITA Nos.70/2009 and other connected matters, disposed off on 30.08.2011 by holding as under:- "From the aforesaid judgments, what emerges is that, there should be uniformity in the ingredients of both the numerator and the denominator of the formula, since otherwise it would produce anomalies or absurd results. Section 10-A is a beneficial section. It is intended to provide incentives to promote exp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cannot be different. Therefore, though there is no definition of the term 'total turnover' in Section 10-A, there is nothing in the said Section to mandate that, what is excluded from the numerator that is export turnover would nevertheless form part of the denominator. Though when a particular word is not defined by the legislature and an ordinary meaning is to be attributed to the same, the said ordinary meaning to be attributed to such word is to be in conformity with the context in which it is used. When the statute prescribes a formula and in the said formula, 'export turnover' is defined, and when the 'total turnover' includes export turnover, the very same meaning given to the export turnover by the legislature is to be adopted while....