Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.21 seconds)
Adp Private Limited, Hyderabad vs Dy.Cit., Circle-1(1),, Hyderabad on 18 January, 2017 cites

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 vs M/S. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd on 23 June, 2010

11. As regards the ground raised by the revenue in its appeal regarding the action of the DRP in directing the AO to exclude data link charges and freight charges both from turnover as well as total turnover while computing deduction u/s 10A, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the DRP as it is in conformity with the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Gem Plus Jewellery (330 ITR 175) as well as different Benches of Tribunal including ITAT, Chennai Bench (SB) in the case of ITO vs. Sak Soft (313 ITR (AT) 853) wherein it is held that communication charges attributable directly to the export of article or thing outside India has to be excluded both from export turnover as well as total turnover while computing exemption u/s 10A of the Act. In view of the ratio laid down as above, the finding of the DRP on this issue is upheld and ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed.
Bombay High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 304 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Sak Soft Ltd on 13 June, 2007

11. As regards the ground raised by the revenue in its appeal regarding the action of the DRP in directing the AO to exclude data link charges and freight charges both from turnover as well as total turnover while computing deduction u/s 10A, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the DRP as it is in conformity with the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Gem Plus Jewellery (330 ITR 175) as well as different Benches of Tribunal including ITAT, Chennai Bench (SB) in the case of ITO vs. Sak Soft (313 ITR (AT) 853) wherein it is held that communication charges attributable directly to the export of article or thing outside India has to be excluded both from export turnover as well as total turnover while computing exemption u/s 10A of the Act. In view of the ratio laid down as above, the finding of the DRP on this issue is upheld and ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed.
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 197 - P P Raja - Full Document
1