PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICE PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/122/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01014946202429 October 2025Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD,T.M.NADAF4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the questions of law raised by the Revenue were already answered by its coordinate benches in previous cases. These prior judgments established that similar technical services fall within the employer-employee relationship and are in the nature of reimbursement.

What were the facts?

The appeal concerns the assessment year 2013-14 and arises from an ITAT order. The Revenue appealed against the Tribunal's decision regarding the taxability of certain technical services provided by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether technical services provided by the assessee are in the nature of reimbursement falling within the employer-employee relationship, and if the substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue survive for consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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.

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43161-DB ITA No. 122 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 122 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , CIRCLE 1 (1), KORAMANGALA BANGALORE.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI., ADVOCATE A/W SRI. E.I. SANMATHI., ADVOCATE) AND:

M/S GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICE PVT LTD WING A WING B AND GROUND FLOOR TO 6TH FLOOR WING C HELIOS BUSINESS PARK 150 OUTER RING KADUBEESANAHALLI

Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43161-DB ITA No. 122 of 2024

BANGALORE -560103 REP BY ITS DIRECTOR.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR.,ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29.04.2022 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO. 364/BANG/2020 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013- 14.PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 29.04.2022 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, A BENCH, BANGALORE, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEES CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN IT(TP)A NO. 364/BANG/2020 FOR A.Y 2013-14 (ANNEXURE A).

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43161-DB ITA No. 122 of 2024

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD)

This appeal is as against the Tribunal's common order dated 29.04.2022 in ITA Nos.362 to 369 and 338 to 345/Bang/2020 for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 & 2015-16 to 2018-19. This appeal is relevant to the assessment year 2013- 14. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has disposed of the appeals relevant to the assessment years in ITA Nos.121/2024 and connected matters by the order dated 03.09.2025, and the Co-ordinate Bench's order in its material part reads as under:

"On hearing learned counsel for the appellants-Revenue, we are of the considered view that the questions raised by the appellants-revenue are answered by the Coordinate Benches of this Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) vs. Abbey Business Services India (P) Ltd., [(2020 122 taxmann.com 174] and in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) and others vs. M/s. Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd., [(2025) SCC OnLine

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43161-DB ITA No. 122 of 2024

Kar 16629]. The Coordinate Benches after considering the clauses and the contentions raised by the appellants -Revenue has held that, such technical services provided by the assessee are in the nature of reimbursement which falls within the employer and employee relationship. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that the substantial questions of law raised in these appeals would no more survive for consideration."

In the light of the afore, this appeal also stands dismissed.

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE SA ct:sr

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 →