TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 2322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... REME COURT] 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. Computation made by the Transfer Pricing Officer - The controversy involved herein is no more res integra in view of the decision of this Court in M/s Softbrands India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2018 (6) TMI 1327 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] wherein it has been observed that unless the finding of the Tribunal is found ex facie perverse, the Appeal u/s. 260-A of the Act, is not maintainable - THE HON BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA FOR THE APPELLANTS : SRI K.V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 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 on 20.10.2015 since reported in (2015) 127 DTR 0327 (Kar), which has been affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Central III vs. HCL Technologies Ltd., [2018] 93 Taxmann.com 33(SC). The relevant portion of the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of HCL Technologies Ltd. (supra), is quoted below for ready reference:- 17. The similar nature of controversy, akin this ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 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 well . 4. The learned Tribunal, after discussing the rival contentions of both the Appellant-Revenue and Respondent-Assessee, has returned a finding with regard to question Nos. 2 and 3 as under: Having heard both the parties and having considered the rival contentions, we find that the assessee has raised various objections before the TPO and while making TP adjustment, the TPO has considered the same and has rejected the objections of the assessee. The assessee ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n such cases. Had it been a case of substantial question of interpretation of provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Treaties (DTAA), interpretation of provisions of the Income Tax Act or Overriding 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 picke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
