DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S WEBEX COMMUNICATION INDIA PVT. LTD., BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 377/BANG/2015Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 April 2019AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the grounds raised by the Revenue were not emanating from the order of the DRP. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order passed by the DCIT pursuant to directions from the DRP. The grounds raised by the Revenue before the Tribunal were not emanating from the DRP's order.

What were the issues?

Whether the grounds raised in the appeal are emanating from the order of the DRP and if not, whether the appeal is maintainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENGALURU BENCH B, BENGALURU

Before: SHRI. A. K. GARODIA

For Appellant: Shri. Rajan Vora, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR

PER LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the DCIT, passed u/s.143(3) r.w,s.144C(13) of the IT Act, in pursuance to the directions of the DRP, for the assessment years 2010-11.

IT(TP)A.377/Bang/2015 & 272/Bang/2014 Page -2

2.

The Revenue in this appeal has raised the following effective ground : 2. The Hon’ble DRP failed to appreciate that the directions issued are beyond the mandate of the provisions of Sec.144C of the IT Act.

3.

The Ld. DR had submitted that the grounds filed before the Tribunal are not emanating from the order passed by the DRP and as such the appeal is not maintainable.

4.

On the other hand the Ld. AR fairly conceded that since the Revenue had already filed an appeal against the order u/s.154 of the Act and the ground raised before the Tribunal are not emanating from the original DRP order and hence the appeal is not maintainable.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The ground raised before us are not emanating from the order of the DRP. In view thereof, the appeal is dismissed.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →