IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-432-2014 (O&M) Date of decision:- 29.04.2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon ...Appellant Versus M/s Sun Life India Service Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA Present: Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate, for appellant . Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent. **** S.J. VAZIFDAR, A.C.J. (ORAL) This is appeal against order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing appellant s appeal against order of CIT (Appeals). matter pertains to assessment year 2007-2008. According to appellant, following are substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ITAT has erred in law in directing to exclude from total turnover corporate subsidy received for reimbursement of expenses to compute total turnover and export turnover for purpose of computation of deduction under Section 10A of Act? (ii) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ITAT has erred in law in directing to exclude from total turnover amount of ` 38.08 lacs communication charges to compute turnover and export turnover for purpose of computation of deduction under Section 10A of Act? (iii) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ITAT AMODH SHARMA 2015.05.01 16:41 has erred in law in directing to exclude from I attest to accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh ITA-432-2014 (O&M) 2 total turnover corporate subsidy and communication charges to compute total turnover and export turnover for purpose of computation of deduction under Section 10A of Act by relying upon decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs Laxmi Machine Works, 290 ITR 667 as issues involved in referred case and instant case are of totally different nature? (iv) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ITAT has erred in law in relying upon decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs Laxmi Machine Works, 290 ITR 667 whereas issue involved in referred case has been amended under Section 145A (a) with effect from 01.04.1999? 2. In facts and circumstances of present case, substantial questions of law do not arise. appellant had claimed deduction under Section 10A of Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of amount of about ` 61.41 lacs. dispute related, inter alia, to question whether amount of ` 6.83 crores received by way of subsidy from parent company of assessee ought to be included in export turnover or not. appellant received amount of ` 6.83 crores by way of subsidy towards reimbursement of pre-operative expenses from April, 2006 to October, 2006. appellant started production in respect of export goods only on 01.11.2006. CIT (Appeals), therefore, held that amount of ` 3.36 crores for period prior thereto was reimbursement of expenses and could not form part of export turnover. However, CIT (Appeals) also held that same cannot form part of total turnover. appellant s grievance is only to effect that entire amount of ` 6.83 crores ought to be taken as part of total turnover. Tribunal found on facts that amount could not be taken as total turnover in any event on parity of reasoning, namely, that amount of about AMODH SHARMA 2015.05.01 16:41 I attest to accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh ITA-432-2014 (O&M) 3 ` 3.36 crores had nothing to do with rendering of services or export of services of software. In that event, amount could not be taken as part of total turnover either. 3. There is nothing to indicate that finding of fact in this regard is perverse. 4. substantial questions of law, therefore, do not arise. Therefore, appeal is dismissed. (S.J. VAZIFDAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE 29.04.2015 Amodh AMODH SHARMA 2015.05.01 16:41 I attest to accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon v. M/s Sun Life India Service Pvt. Ltd