M/S. SASKEN TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE

ITA 2546/BANG/2019Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 March 2022AY 2016-1731 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue of claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) is settled by the Karnataka High Court in favour of the assessee. It also directed the AO to provide consequential relief regarding MAT credit based on earlier years' orders.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sasken Technologies Limited, appealed against an order concerning the taxability of gains from the assignment of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). Disputes arose from a joint development agreement with Spreadtrum Communications Inc. for protocol stack software.

What were the issues?

The key issues involved the taxability of gains from IPR assignment and the allowability of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) and MAT credit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10AA,Section 35DD,Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(17)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI B. R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, CA
For Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Hearing: 09.03.2022Pronounced: 16.03.2022

Per N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 27.11.2019 of CIT(A), Bengaluru -10, relating to Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is general and calls for no specific adjudication. Grounds Nos.2 and 3 raised by the assessee is with regard to the issue whether the gain on sale / Assignment of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) is assessable to tax at all and if so assessable to tax whether it has to be assessed to tax under the head “Income from Business or Profession” or “Capital Gain”.

3.

The facts and circumstances under which the aforesaid issue arises for consideration are that the

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 10AA

All 857 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →