PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KASEYA SOFTWARE

PDF · subscribers
ITA/518/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01042219201631 July 2017Bench: K.S.MUDAGAL,H.G.RAMESH2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the appeal. The Court noted that the learned counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that the questions raised in the present appeal had already been answered against the appellants by this Court in two previous decisions: CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [2012] 341 ITR 385 (Karn) and CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 98 (Karn). Based on this submission and the established precedent, the Court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's order and accordingly dismissed the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was disposed of based on prior rulings.

What were the facts?

The appellants, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Karnataka. The appeal challenges an order dated 26.02.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Bengaluru, in ITA No.796/BANG/2015. The assessment year in question is 2010-11. The respondent is M/s. Kaseya Software (India) Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was filed for admission.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal's order dated 26.02.2016, in appeal proceedings ITA No.796/BANG/2015 for the assessment year 2010-11, is sustainable in law? (Question of law) The appellants' contention, as presented by their learned counsel, is that the questions raised in this appeal have been answered against them by this Court in previous decisions. They specifically refer to the judgments in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [2012] 341 ITR 385 (Karn) and CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 98 (Karn). The revenue did not present any arguments beyond acknowledging the binding precedent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.518/2016

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2017

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.518/2016

BETWEEN :

1.

PR.COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX-4

BMTC COMPLEX

KORAMANGALA

BENGALURU

2.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX

CIRCLE 4(1)(1)

BMTC COMPLEX

KORAMANGALA

BENGALURU

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI SANMATHI.E.I, ADVOCATE)

AND :

M/S.KASEYA SOFTWARE (INDIA) P.LTD NEIL ROAD TECH PARK PLOT NO.118, ROAD NO.3 EPIP PHASE-1 WHITE FIELD, BENGALURU-66 ...RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED:26.02.2016 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

ITA No.518/2016

-2-

TRIBUNAL,‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN ITA NO.796/BANG/2015 (3), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010- 11.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, H.G.RAMESH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):

Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submits that the questions raised in this appeal are answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [2012] 341 ITR 385 (Karn) and CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 98 (Karn). The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed. Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →