THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/2804/2005HC KarnatakaKAHC01036706200503 September 2026Bench: R DEVDAS,K.MANMADHA RAO10 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court accepted the memo filed by the appellants (revenue) and dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. The Court noted that the appeals were filed by the revenue and, in terms of CBDT Circular No. 9/2024, the value of these appeals fell below the prescribed monetary limits, rendering them not maintainable. The Court acknowledged that the withdrawal was at the risk of the appellants. It was also observed that since the respondents had preferred appeals in other matters, the issues could be argued in those appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn, without a decision on the merits of the underlying tax disputes.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax and the Income-Tax Officer against orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent in these appeals was either M/s Infosys Technologies Ltd or M/s Wipro Ltd. The appeals concerned various assessment years, including 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, and 2003-04. The appeals were filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the ITAT's orders dated November 11, 2005, and December 30, 2005. The revenue sought to set aside the ITAT's orders and confirm the orders passed by the Income Tax Officer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals filed by the revenue are maintainable given the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 dated September 17, 2024 (Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961)? Assessee's Contention (Revenue): The revenue contended that the appeals were below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 and therefore prayed for the appeals to be dismissed as withdrawn, stating they were not maintainable. They also argued that Clause 7 of the circular protects the respondents' interests and that the withdrawal would not allow the appellants to gain advantage in other pending appeals. Revenue's Contention (Assessee): The respondent (assessee) argued that the matters should be decided on merits, as the revenue was taking advantage of the situation where decisions in other similar matters were against the respondents, and the respondents had already preferred appeals in those cases. The respondent's counsel submitted that the matters should be decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 613 OF 2006 C/W INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 2804 OF 2005 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 2805 OF 2005 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 2807 OF 2005 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 614 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 615 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 616 OF 2006

IN ITA No. 613/2006 BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTL. TAXATION), WARD 19(2) RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI E. I. SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI NIRMAL MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL)

Digitally signed by G SHREERAKSHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HC-KAR AND:

M/S INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD PLOT NO.44 AND 97A, 3RD CROSS ELECTRIC CITY, HOSUR ROAD BANGALORE 561 229. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI T. SURYANARAYANA RAO, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI VINAY GIRI, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11-11-2005 PASSED IN ITA NO.145/BANG/2004, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01, PRAYING THAT ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN ITA NO.145/BANG/2004 DATED 11-11-2005 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) WARD-19(2), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

IN ITA NO. 2804/2005 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTL. TAXATION), WARD 19(2) RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI NIRMAL MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL)

HC-KAR AND:

M/S WIPRO LTD DODDAKANNELI SARJAPUR ROAD BANGALORE-560 035. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADVOCATE) THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30-12-2005 PASSED IN ITA NO.153/BANG/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AS PRAYED FOR THEREIN.

IN ITA NO. 2805/2005 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTL. TAXATION), WARD 19(2) RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI NIRMAL MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL)

HC-KAR AND:

M/S WIPRO LTD DODDAKANNELLI SARJAPUR ROAD BANGALORE-560 035. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADVOCATE) THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30-12-2005 PASSED IN ITA NO.154/BANG/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AS PRAYED FOR THEREIN. IN ITA NO. 2807/2005 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTL. TAXATION), WARD 19(2) RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI NIRMAL MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL)

AND:

M/S WIPRO LTD DODDAKANNELLI SARJAPUR ROAD HC-KAR BANGALORE-560 035. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADVOCATE) THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30-12-2005 PASSED IN ITA NO.152/BANG/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AS PRAYED FOR THEREIN. IN ITA NO. 614/2006 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTL. TAXATION), WARD 19(2) RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI NIRMAL MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL)

AND:

M/S INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD PLOT NO.44 AND 97A 3RD CROSS, ELECTRIC CITY HOSUR ROAD BANGALORE – 561 229. ...RESPONDENT HC-KAR (BY SRI T. SURYANARAYANA RAO, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI VINAY GIRI, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11-11-2005 PASSED IN ITA NO.146/BANG/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN ITA NO.146/BANG/2004 DATED 11-11-2005 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), WARD-19(2), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN ITA NO. 615/2006 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTL. TAXATION), WARD 19(2) RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI NIRMAL MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL)

AND:

M/S INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD PLOT NO.44 AND 97A 3RD CROSS, ELECTRIC CITY HOSUR ROAD HC-KAR BANGALORE – 561 229. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI T. SURYANARAYANA RAO, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI VINAY GIRI, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11-11-2005 PASSED IN ITA NO.148/BANG/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN ITA NO.148/BANG/2004 DATED 11-11-2005 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), WARD-19(2), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN ITA NO. 616/2006 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTL. TAXATION), WARD 19(2) RASTROTHANA BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI NIRMAL MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL)

AND:

M/S INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD PLOT NO.44 AND 97A 3RD CROSS, ELECTRIC CITY HC-KAR HOSUR ROAD BANGALORE – 561 229. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI T. SURYANARAYANA RAO, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI VINAY GIRI, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11-11-2005 PASSED IN ITA NO.147/BANG/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN ITA NO.147/BANG/2004 DATED 11-11-2005 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), WARD-19(2), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS and HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS)

Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo stating that the appeals are below the prescribed monetary limit as set out in CBDT Circular No.9/2024 dated 17.09.2024. Therefore, the appellants pray that the HC-KAR appeals may be dismissed as withdrawn since the appeals are not maintainable in view of the circular. 2. However, learned counsel Sri.Sandeep Huilgol appearing for the respondents in ITA No.2804/2005, ITA No.2805/2005 and ITA No.2807/2005 submits that the matters have to be decided on merits since the appellants are taking advantage of the fact that, in other similar matters, the decisions are against the respondents and the respondents have already preferred appeals in those matters. 3. However, learned counsel for the appellants submits that Clause 7 of the CBDT Circular No.9/2024 dated 17.09.2024 protects the interest of the respondents, while making it clear that the withdrawal of the appeals will not in any way enable the appellants to contend or take advantage of the decisions that would be made in the appeals that are maintainable in favour of the appellants. 4. In the considered opinion of this Court, since the appeals are filed by the revenue and, in terms of the HC-KAR circular, since the value of these appeals are below the prescribed monetary limits, the appeals will not be maintainable and, therefore, at the risk of the appellants, they are seeking to withdraw the appeals filed by them. At any rate, since the respondents are said to have preferred appeals in other matters, these questions can always be argued in those appeals filed by the respondents. 5. Accordingly, we accept the memo filed by the appellants and proceed to dismiss these appeals as withdrawn.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE

Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE

GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →