9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 826X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penditure from total turnover after excluding the same from the export turnover for computing deduction u/s 10B of the Act. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had debited ₹ 57,02,457/- towards telecommunication charges in the Profit Loss Account. The assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that if the telecommunication charges are to be excluded from export turnover the same should be excluded from the total turnover of the undertaking, to properly computing the deduction u/s 10B. The assessee relied on the decision of the Chennai D Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs Sak Soft Ltd, [2009] 121 TTJ (Chennai) (SB) 865 wherein the Tribunal held that expenditure excluded from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer. The assessee has relied before us on the decision of the Chennai Special Bench in the case of Sak Soft Ltd (supra). We find that on the similar issue and on similar facts of the case, the Tribunal has held as under: If the rule of casus omissus were to be applied to the present case, it would mean that since the words 'total turnover' have not been defined for the purpose of s. lOB their meaning cannot be supplied at all. which will result in absurdity and make the formula prescribed by sub-so (4) unworkable. This will result in the whole section becoming unworkable, a consequence which cannot be countenanced at all under any circumstances. The interpretation which is being placed on the words ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not been done, a consistent and uniform construction of the word having reqard to the scheme and. purpose of the incentive provisions has to be given.-CIT vs. Lotus Trans Travels (P) Ltd (2007) 207 cm (Del) 105 : (2007)290 ITR 1 (Del), Raghubans Narain Singh vs The Uttar Pradesh Government, AIR 1967 SC 465 and Central Bank of India vs. Ravindra Ors. AIR 2001 SC 3095 applied. 7. The DR could not bring any material on record to show that the above quoted decision of the Tribunal was reversed in appeal by a higher forum. The facts being identical, respectfully following the precedent, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and direct the Assessing Officer to reduce the telecommunication charges of ₹ 57,02,4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
