Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2021 (10) TMI 1248 - AT - Income TaxComputation of deduction u/s 10AA - exclusion of telecommunicating expenses and internet usage charges from the export as well as total turnover while computing deduction - HELD THAT - As relying on M/S. IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD. 2019 (8) TMI 1226 - ITAT BANGALORE DR did not bring on record any contrary view or order against the order of this Tribunal. Therefore we hold that any amount reduced from export turnover should also be reduced from the amount of total turnover in the computation of deduction u/s. 10AA of the Act. Thus ground raised by the assessee is allowed. Exclusion of expenditure on account of technical services from the export as well as total turnover while computing deduction u/s. 10AA - HELD THAT - As relying on own case 2019 (8) TMI 1325 - ITAT PUNE hold that any amount of foreign exchange expenses reduced from export turnover should also be reduced from the amount of total turnover in the computation of deduction u/s. 10AA of the Act. Thus ground raised by the assessee is allowed. Onsite/deputation of technical manpower (DTM) software services not eligible for deduction u/s. 10AA - HELD THAT - We note that in assessee s own case i.e. IGATE Global Solution Ltd. as it was then in A.Y. 2007-08 2019 (8) TMI 1226 - ITAT BANGALORE on transfer Pune Benches of ITAT discussed the issue in great detail and turned down the contention of Revenue that the income from onsite/DTM was not derived from export of computer software and is not qualified for deduction u/s. 10A/10AA of the Act. Further the Co-ordinate Bench held that Explanation 3 is a deeming provision which specifically brings profits and gains derived from on site development of computer software and services for development of software outside India within the meaning of the profits and gains derived from the export of computer software outside India which means that not only the profits and gains derived by the eligible undertaking from export of computer software are eligible for deduction but also profits and gains derived from onsite development of computer software and services for development of software outside India. The words derived from contained in sub-section (1) of section 10A is not an exhaustive provision and it has been further elaborated in sub-section (4) to mean the amount which bears to the profits of the business of the undertaking the same proportion as the export turnover in respect of such articles or things or computer software bears to the total turnover of the business carried on by the undertaking. The Co-ordinate Bench opined when there exists a direct link between the eligible undertaking and some income the same is profit of the business of undertaking even if may not be derived from the export of computer software etc. The proposition as enunciated by the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case i.e. iGATE Global Solution Ltd as it was the then in A.Y. 2007-08 has been followed by this Tribunal in assessee s own case in A.Y. 2010-11 2020 (3) TMI 338 - ITAT PUNE therefore we hold that the income from onsite/DTM rendered abroad is considered to be derived from the export of computer software is eligible for deduction u/s. 10A/10AA of the Act. Nature of gain - foreign exchange gain falls on capital account or revenue account - HELD THAT - AO opined that the foreign operations are part and parcel of the overall company s operations and cannot be regarded as separate or independent operations and accordingly an amount being amount credited in the year under consideration as held as taxable - CIT(A) directed the AO to ascertain the amount of foreign exchange gain on capital account and on the revenue account and to delete the addition on account of furnishing of gain on capital account. It is clear from the impugned order that the ld. CIT(A) sent the mater back to the file of AO for making addition only in respect of foreign exchange gain on revenue account. The claim of the assessee is on the same line as has been directed by the ld. CIT(A) to be done accordingly we therefore dismiss the ground taken by the assessee. Disallowance of depreciation on goodwill - HELD THAT - As the assessee acquired entity IT T Ltd. and taken overall net worth of its assets totaling to Rs. 10, 57, 24, 413/- which clearly evidenced in the financials of assessee in the Agreement at Page No. 8 of the paper book. Likewise the assessee also shown the total consideration as goodwill under acquisition in the Balance sheet therefore we find the order of CIT(A) is incorrect in holding that no evidences showing acquisition in the F.Y. 2003-04. In the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above we find force in the arguments of the ld. AR that the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation on goodwill. Depreciation on goodwill only on the written down value of the goodwill starting from F.Y. 2003-04 onwards. The assessee placed on record a chartof the assessment order by which the opening written down value of the F.Y. 2003-04 at Rs. 105, 724, 413/- and after depreciation allowing @ 25% the closing written down value at Rs. 79, 293, 310/-. In the same way the written down value has been computed in each of the succeeding year and for F.Y. 2009-10 arrived at Rs. 14, 112, 506/-. Thus it is well constitutes the opening written down value of goodwill for the F.Y. 2010-11 relevant to A.Y. 2011-12 i.e. the year under consideration. We therefore direct the AO to grant depreciation @ 25% on written down value of the goodwill at Rs. 14, 112, 506/-. Thus ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Denial of carry forward of long term capital loss - AO observed that the said amount is net of short term capital loss and said short term capital loss is disallowable u/s. 94(7) - HELD THAT - If we accept the interpretation rendered by both the authorities below definitely it would frustrate the object contemplated u/s. 80 of the Act. Section 80 of the Act explains that no loss which has not been determined in pursuance of a return filed shall be carried forward in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 139 of the Act. Admittedly there was no return of loss u/s. 139(3) of the Act as the assessee declared positive income u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Even then in our opinion that when the AO found variation in long term capital loss he should have allowed carry forward of such loss in the assessment proceedings itself because When the he taxed the difference in amount under short term capital gain and also disallowed short term capital loss u/s. 94(7) of the Act definitely in our opinion the AO should have allowed carry forward of differential amount under long term capital loss and for denying the same in our opinion is not justified. Therefore we direct the AO to allow carry forward the difference of amount. Addition of foreign tax credit - HELD THAT - We note that the CIT(A) directed the AO to obtain documents as required under Rule 128(8) of the Income Tax Rules and to give benefit of foreign tax credit. It is seen that the several issues came up for consideration in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10. Since the facts and circumstances of the instant ground are similar to those of the earlier years as discussed in the aforesaid order for A.Y. 2009-10 in the said impugned order and remit the matter back to the file of AO for re-deciding this issue in conformity with the relevant discussion given by the Tribunal in the said order. Needless to say the assessee shall be offered reasonable opportunity of hearing. Thus ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Deduction paid towards Education Cess under Finance Act while computing the taxable income - HELD THAT- The Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Sesa Goa Ltd. 2020 (3) TMI 347 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT was pleased to hold that the Education Cess is an allowable expenditure as per the provision of the I.T. Act - we direct the AO to allow deduction in respect of Education Cess paid by the assessee. Accordingly the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed. Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D - Mandation of recording satisfaction - HELD THAT - the contention of the ld. AR is that there was no satisfaction recorded by the AO as confirmed by the CIT(A) regarding the disallowance made by the assessee on its own is incorrect and we find that the AO categorically held that the disallowance made by the assessee is not accepatable thereby the submission of ld. AR is rejected. We find in the present case the AO clearly recorded is non-satisfaction regarding the disallowance made by the assessee on its own relating to exempt income and proceeded to invoke the procedure contemplated under Rule 8D of the Rule. Therefore the contention of ld. AR that the finding of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2011-12 is applicable to the year under consideration is rejected therefore we hold the facts in A.Y. 2011-12 in consolidated order of this Tribunal 2019 (3) TMI 1135 - ITAT PUNE are not identical to the fact of the year under consideration. In view of the same we hold the order of CIT(A) in this regard in holding that the AO did not record any satisfaction relating to the disallowance made by the assessee on its own is not justified. Thus the order of CIT(A) is set aside in this regard and the order of AO is restored. Accordingly ground raised by the Revenue is allowed.
|