THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , vs. M/S ALTAIR ENGINEERING INC

PDF · subscribers
ITA/60/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01005761202415 October 2025Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD,T.M.NADAF3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since the Revenue failed to demonstrate any difference in facts or law for the current assessment year compared to previous years, the appeal should be dismissed. This decision aligns with a coordinate bench's ruling on similar matters.

What were the facts?

The appeal concerns the assessee's liability to pay royalty on software sales for assessment year 2020-21. The Revenue's appeals for similar demands in assessment years 2019-20 and 2021-22 were disposed of based on a Supreme Court decision.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether receipts from software sales constituted royalty. The court considered the applicability of a Supreme Court judgment to the current assessment year.

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:40860-DB ITA No. 60 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH 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. 60 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU 560095.

2.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INTERNATIONA TAXATION CIRCLE 1(1), 4TH FLOOR BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560095.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S ALTAIR ENGINEERING INC C/O M/S ALTAIR ENGINEER INDIA PVT LTD, NO. 46, FIRST FLOOR, PRESTIGE TRADE TOWER PALACE ROAD, MUNICIPAL WARD NO. 77, SAMPANGIRAMANAGAR, BENGALURU 560001

Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40860-DB ITA No. 60 of 2024

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. TATA KRISHNA.,ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO II. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(IT)A NO. 642/BANG/2023 DATED 30/10/2023 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-2021 ANNEXURE-A AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE DRP CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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:40860-DB ITA No. 60 of 2024

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

The substantial questions of law proposed for consideration relates to the assessee's liability to pay royalty on the receipts for sale of software and relates to the assessment year 2020-21. However, it remains undisputed that the Revenue's appeals for a similar demand/levy for the assessment years 2019-20 and 2021-22 in ITA Nos.708/2023 and 135/2024 are disposed of in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Ltd. v. CIT and Another - [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC].

In the light of the afore, especially with the Co- ordinate bench of this Court holding that the Revenue has not demonstrated any difference in facts or law relevant to the other assessment years and because admittedly this observation applies to the present assessment year, the appeal 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 →