Bombay High Court
Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax 15 vs Lionbridge Technologies Pvt Ltd on 13 February, 2019
Bench: Akil Kureshi, B.P.Colabawalla
6.itxa.1533.2016.db.doc
dik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O.O.C.J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1533 OF 2016
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-15 ...Appellant
vs
Lionbridge Technologies Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent.
.....
Mr Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.
Mr B.M.Chatterji Sr. Counsel a/w Mr Shreyash Shah, Mr Vishesh
Srivastav, Mr Pritesh Chatterji & Mr Ranit Basu I/b Girish Pikale for
the Respondent.
.....
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI &
B.P.COLABAWALLA, JJ.
FEBRUARY 13, 2019.
P.C. :
The appeal is admitted for consideration of following substantial question of law -
"(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Tribunal is justified in directing to exclude the comparable of M/s Kals Information System Ltd. and Persistent System Ltd. for AY 2010-2011 while determining the Arm Length Price ?"
2 We noticed that the Revenue has suggested three more question in this appeal which read thus-
"(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in law in deleting the addition made on account of foreign exchange loss of Rs.4,80,35,675/- holding that the same is neither accrued nor an actual loss ?
(2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in law in directing AO to allow the claim of deduction u/s 10A on the profit of business as increased by the disallowance made on account of foreign exchange loss ? (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Pg 1 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 18/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2019 08:03:50 :::
6.itxa.1533.2016.db.doc Hon'ble ITAT erred in solely relying on the Bombay High Court's decision of Gem Plus Jewellery {330 ITR 175 (Bom)} which has been contested by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Apex Court?"
3 However, there is an admitted position between the parties that all these question had come up before this Court in case of this very same assessee and the Revenue's appeals were dismissed by referring to the Judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. HCL Technologies Ltd. reported in (2018) 404 ITR 719 (SC). Reference to the order of this Court in the case of the assessee can be made to (1) Income Tax Appeal No.97 of 2015 decided on 18th September, 2017 and (2) Income Tax Appeal No.1528 of 2016 decided on 30th January, 2019. The additional questions, therefore, are not considered. 4 The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Tribunal. This would enable the Tribunal to keep papers and proceedings relating to the present appeal available, to be produced when sought for by the Court.
5 Mr Chatterji, waives service for the Respondent. (B.P.COLABAWALLA, J.) (AKIL KURESHI, J.) Pg 2 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 18/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2019 08:03:50 :::