Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1835 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURTDeduction u/s 10A computation - HELD THAT:- As decided in HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD. [2018 (5) TMI 357 - SUPREME COURT] what is excluded from ‘export turnover’ must also be excluded from ‘total turnover’, since one of the components of ‘total turnover’ is export turnover. Hence, the substantial question of law as suggested at (1) would no more survives for consideration. TP Adjustment - comparable selection - tribunal holding that certain comparables are functionally different and liable to be excluded from the list of comparables - grant Market Risk Adjustment - HELD THAT:- As decided in M/S. SOFTBRANDS INDIA P. LTD. [2018 (6) TMI 1327 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] This court cannot be expected to undertake the exercise of comparison of the comparables itself which is essentially a fact-finding exercise. Neither the sufficient Data nor factual information’s nor any technical expertise is available with this Court to undertake any such fact-finding exercise in the said appeals under Section 260-A of the Act. This Courtis only concerned with the question of law and that too a substantial one, which has a well-defined connotations as explained above and findings of facts arrived at by the Tribunal in these type of assessments like any other type of assessments in other regular assessment provisions of the Act, viz. Sections 143, 147 etc. are final and are binding on this Court. While dealing with these appeals undersection 260-A of the Act, we cannot disturb those findings of fact under Section 260-A of the Act, we cannot disturb those findings of the fact under Section 260-A of the Act, unless such findings are ex-facie perverse and unsustainable and exhibit a total non-application of mind by the Tribunal to the relevant facts of the case and evidence before the Tribunal. Advance for occupying additional space - Disallowance u/s 37(1) - AO had held that the rental deposit is in the nature of capital investment and it is not adjustable out of future rental expenditure - HELD THAT:- Tribunal found that the amount is towards advance for lease of additional space and the loss of money is in the course of business which amount has been written off as workable capital. It is not in dispute that the assessee had paid a sum of ₹ 20,00,000/- towards advance for lease of additional space for its business expansion. Due to breach of contract the assessee has suffered loss of ₹ 20,00,000/- as the assessee could not recover the same, which amount is written off as irrecoverable. The finding arrived at by the Tribunal as well as the Commissioner is a finding of fact which would not give rise to any substantial question of law.
|