THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT (A) vs. M/S BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS PVT LTD

ITA/24/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01000281202125 June 2021Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the respondent, M/s. Brocade Communications Systems Pvt. Ltd., had informed the Court that the dispute had been settled under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. A memo to this effect was filed and accepted by the Court. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of based on this settlement. The Court did not adjudicate on the merits of the original tax dispute. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as settled.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax against an order dated February 19, 2020, passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru. The ITAT's order in IT(TP)A No.481/BANG/2016 pertained to Assessment Year 2011-12 and confirmed an order of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), which in turn had confirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax. The assessee is M/s. Brocade Communications Systems Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the order passed by the ITAT, confirming the DRP's order and the Assessing Officer's order for Assessment Year 2011-12, was legally sustainable. The appeal was filed by the revenue. The respondent (assessee) informed the Court that the matter had been settled under the provisions of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. No specific arguments from either side regarding the merits of the original dispute are recorded in this judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

AND

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY

INCOME TAX APPEAL No.24 OF 2021

BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME-TAX, CIT(A)

5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA

BENGALURU-560 095

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2)

2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

6TH BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD

KORMANGALA

BENGALURU-560 095

... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI ARAVND K.V., ADVOCATE)

AND: M/S.BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., 7TH FLOOR ‘A’ WING, TOWER 3, PHASE 1 VRINDAVAN TECH VILLAGE SEZ OUTER RING ROAD DEVERABEESANAHALLI VILLAGE VARTHUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 037

…. RESPONDENT

(BY SRI T.SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE) *****

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.02.2020 (ANNEXURE-D) PASSED BY THE INCOME- TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A NO.481/BANG/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE DRP AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BENGALURU.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

Sri T.Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the respondent was fair enough to inform this Court that the matter has been settled under the provisions of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. Memo filed to the said effect is accordingly accepted. The appeal stands disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →