TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 470
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2011 (M/s. Acusis Software India Pvt. Ltd., vs. The Income tax Officer) for A.Y.2004-2005. 2. The proposed substantial questions of law framed in the Memorandum of appeal by the Appellants-Revenue are quoted below for ready reference:- "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law holding that the assign authority is not right in including expenditure incurred in foreign currency from export turnover and from total turnover by relying upon the decision of this Hon'ble Court in case of CIT V/s Tata Elsxi even when the assessing authority has rightly included the according to parameters set out in section 10 A and the decision relied upon by the Tribunal has not reached finality ? ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Learned counsel for the Appellants-Revenue Mr. K.V. Aravind submits that he does not press the substantial questions of law Nos. 3 and 6. His submission is recorded. 4. Regarding substantial question of law No.1:- Learned counsel for the Appellants-Revenue Mr. K.V. Aravind submits that he does not press the 1st substantial question of law, as the issue regarding deduction of expenditure incurred for 'Export Turn Over' is also required to be deducted from 'Total Turn Over' for the purpose of computing the deduction u/s.10A of the Act, the controversy is no longer res integra and is covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s.Tata Elxsi Ltd., vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, decided....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n and insurance attributable to the delivery of computer software under Section 10A of the IT Act are allowed only in Export Turnover but not from the Total Turnover then, it would give rise to inadvertent, unlawful, meaningless and illogical result which would cause grave injustice to the Respondent which could have never been the intention of the legislature. 20. Even in common parlance, when the object of the formula is to arrive at the profit from export business, expenses excluded from export turnover have to be excluded from total turnover also. Otherwise, any other interpretation makes the formula unworkable and absurd. Hence, we are satisfied that such deduction shall be allowed from the total turnover in same proportion as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t be compared with a company rendering purely ITES services. And in this regard, reliance can be placed on the following decisions: (a) Genisys Integratingn Systems (India) (P). Ltd., Vs. Dy. CIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 715/53 SOT 159 (Bang.-Trib.) (b) Kodiak Networks (India) (P.) Ltd, V. Asstt. CIT (20125) 18 taxmann. Com 32/51 SOT 191 (Bang. - Trib.) (c) Telcordia Technologies India (P.) Ltd., V. Asstt. CIT (20125) 22 taxmann.com 96/137 ITD 1 (Mum. - Trib.) We do not find any reason to differ with the ratio laid down in the above cases. Therefore, we direct the TPO/AO to exclude this company from the list of the comparables." Regarding substantial question of Law No.4: vi) M/s. Cosmic Gl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Effect of the Treaties over the Domestic Legislations or the questions like Treaty Shopping, Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals of the present tenor as to whether the comparables have been rightly picked up or not, Filters for arriving at the correct list of comparables have been rightly applied or not, do not in our considered opinion, give rise to any substantial question of law. ....