IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 905 OF 2009 AND INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1118 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income-tax-, ... Appellant. V/s. Savvion India Pvt.Ltd. ... Respondent. Suresh Kumar for the appellant. S.E.Dastur with Niraj Seth i/b. Mint & Confreres for the respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 7th August 2009. P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The questions raised in both these appeals are common relating to different assessment years. The questions raised read as under: A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in holding that the assessee company is a manufacturer of software, notwithstanding that the company s only function was limited to downloading and testing the software developed by its parent company? B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case an in law, the ITAT was justified in holding that the assessee company was actually exporting the software, notwithstanding that the company was only returning back to its parent company the software sent to it for limited purpose of testing? 3. As regards the first question is concerned, the revenue has not challenged the decision of the C.I.T.(A) holding that the activity carried out by the assessee is a manufacturing activity. Therefore, the first question does not arise out the impugned order of the Tribunal. 4. As regards the second question is concerned, once it is accepted by the revenue that the activity carried out by the assessee amounts to manufacturing activity, then, obviously, export of that product would amount to export. Therefore, second question also cannot be said to be a substantial question of law arising out of the impugned order. 5. In the above view of the matter, both appeals are dismissed for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)