OOREDOO Q P S C vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/29731/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01059527202409 January 2025Author: S.G.PANDIT5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the order dated April 12, 2023, passed under Section 148A(d) and the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court found that the issues raised were covered by the Division Bench decision in Vodafone Idea Ltd. vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax. The reasoning was based on the established precedent set by the Division Bench. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to file a review petition based on the outcome of the review petition pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ooredoo Q P S C (formerly Qtel), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an order dated April 12, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-17. The challenge also extended to notices issued under Section 148 of the Act. The dispute concerned interconnect usage charges. Both parties agreed that the issues raised were covered by a previous decision of the Division Bench of the same High Court in Vodafone Idea Ltd. vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed under Section 148A(d) and the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning interconnect usage charges, are liable to be quashed in light of the Division Bench judgment in Vodafone Idea Ltd. vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order and notices should be quashed as the issues are squarely covered by the Division Bench decision in Vodafone Idea Ltd. (supra). Revenue's Contention: The revenue acknowledged that the Division Bench decision in Vodafone Idea Ltd. (supra) was relevant. However, it pointed out that the Supreme Court decision in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and Another, which was relied upon by the Division Bench, was under review before the Apex Court. The revenue sought liberty to file a review petition if their review petition before the Supreme Court succeeded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 29731 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

OOREDOO Q P S C M/S OOREDOO QATAR (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MS. QTEL) C/O TAX COMPASS OFFICE AT 56/1 FIRST FOOR, KANAKAPURA ROAD BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE-560004 KARNATAKA

(AUTHORISED REPESENTATIVE MR. MUKESH SHAH S/O ROSHANLAL SHAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS) REGISTERED AS PUBLIC JOINT STOCK COMPANY …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NARENDRA KUMAR J JAIN, ADV. FOR SMT. GEETHA RANI K., ADV.)

AND:

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-2(1) 4TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80FT ROAD, BENGALURU-580095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP M & SRI SANMATI, ADVS.)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED BY AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR OTHERWISE THE IMPUGNED

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

ORDER DATED 12.04.2023 ISSUED BY THE LEARNED RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 148A(D) VIDE DIN/ITBA/AST/F/148A/ 2023- 24/1052025711(1) FOR AY 2016-17 ENCLOSED IN ANNX-A AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

ORAL ORDER Learned counsel Sri.Dilip.M., accepts notice for the respondent.

2.

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Narendra Kumar.J., for petitioner and learned counsel Sri.Dilip.M., for respondent/Revenue. Perused the writ petition papers.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the order passed under Clause(d) of Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘1961 Act’) as well as notices issued under Section 148 of 1961 Act.

4.

Learned counsel would submit that the subject matter of the writ petition as well as the order passed relates to interconnect usage charges. It is submitted by both the learned counsel that the issues raised in the present writ petition is covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in VODAFONE IDEA LTD., VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)1.

5.

Learned counsel Sri.Dilip.M., appearing for respondent would only submit that the Division Bench of this Court placed reliance on the decision of the ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER2 and it is submitted that against the decision in ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED (supra), Revenue has filed Review Petition. Therefore, he seeks liberty to file

1 (2023) 152 taxmann.com 575 (Karnataka) 2 (2022) 3 SCC 321

review, if they succeed in the Review Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court.

6.

Submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties is considered carefully and on going through the pleadings and the decisions on which, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on reliance i.e., VODAFONE IDEA LTD., (supra), I am of the view that the prayer of the petitioner needs to be allowed in terms of the decision of the VODAFONE IDEA LTD., (supra).

7.

Accordingly, Annexure-A bearing No.DIN ITBA/AST/F/148A/2023-24/1052025711(1) dated 12.04.2023 and Annexure-B bearing No.DIN ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2023-24/1052025958(1) dated 12.04.2023 are quashed.

8.

Liberty is reserved to the Revenue to file Review Petition based on the outcome of the Review Petition pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED (supra).

9.

With the above, writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →