9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 2057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity and as well as in return of income filed for the year in question - HELD THAT:- This Court in a recent judgment in Prl. Commissioner of Income Tax Anr. v- M/s Softbrands India Pvt. Ltd.[ 2018 (6) TMI 1327 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] held that in these type of cases, unless an ex-facie perversity in the findings of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is established by the appellant, the appeal at the instance of an assessee or the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Act is not maintainable. No substantial question of law arises in the present case. - I.T.A. No. 241/2017 - - - Dated:- 16-8-2018 - Hon ble Dr. Justice Vineet Kothari And The Hon ble Mrs. Justice S. Sujatha For the Appellants : Sri. Sanmathi E I, Adv. F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ussing the rival contentions of both the Appellants-Revenue and Respondent-Assessee, has returned findings as under: Regarding Substantial Question of law No. 1: 18. Having considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record, we note that an identical set of 26 comparables was considered by the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Meritor LVS India Ltd. (supra). The Tribunal has considered the comparability of these companies in para 12 to 14 as under: xxxxxxxxxxx Accordingly, following the order of the co- ordinate bench of this Tribunal, we direct the A.O./TPO to exclude the following companies from the set of comparables: Sl. No. Name of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the issue of allowability of the deduction is concerned it has been decided in favour of the assessee by this tribunal by following the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Biocon Ltd. 115 TTJ 649. However since the relevant to details of the claim has not been examined by the Assessing Officer and further the apportionment of the expenditure between 10A and non-10A units is also required to be examined and verified. Therefore that claim of the assessee has to be apportioned between units eligible under Section 10A and the units which is not eligible for the deduction under Section 10A and then it has to be allowed against the respective income of the separate units. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals of the present tenor as to whether the comparables have been rightly picked up or not, Filters for arriving at the correct list of comparables have been rightly applied or not, do not in our considered opinion, give rise to any substantial question of law. 56. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the present appeals filed by the Revenue do not give rise to any substantial question of law and the suggested substantial questions of law do not meet the requirements of Section 260-A of the Act and thus the appeals filed by the Revenue are found to be devoid of merit and the same are liable to be dismissed. 57. We make it clear that the same yardsticks a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
