PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. M/S KASEYA SOFTWARE

PDF · subscribers
ITA/519/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01045197201601 August 2017Bench: K.S.MUDAGAL,H.G.RAMESH2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. The dismissal was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants (revenue). The revenue's counsel conceded that the questions of law raised in the present appeal had already been decided against the revenue by the same High Court in previous judgments. Specifically, the court referred to its decisions in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2012)341 ITR 385 (Karn)] and CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [(2012)349 ITR 98 (Karn)]. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of without delving into the merits of the case, as the revenue acknowledged that the grounds for appeal were not sustainable in light of existing precedents. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was decided on the basis of the revenue's concession.

What were the facts?

The appellants, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(1), Bengaluru, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal challenges an order dated February 26, 2016, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 797/Bang/2015. The assessment year in question is 2011-12. The respondent is M/s. Kaseya Software (India) P. Ltd. The appeal sought to formulate substantial questions of law and set aside the ITAT's order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should formulate substantial questions of law arising from the ITAT's order dated February 26, 2016, for the assessment year 2011-12. Assessee's Contention: The assessee did not present any arguments as the appeal was dismissed based on concessions made by the revenue. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellants (revenue) fairly submitted that the questions raised in this appeal have already been 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)].

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.519/2016

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2017

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.519/2016

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-I WHITE FIELD BENGALURU-66 PAN: AADCR3905A

...RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER

ITA No.519/2016

-2-

DATED:26.02.2016 PASSED BY THE ITAT IN ITA NO.797/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12.

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 →