Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
- 1 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40541-DB ITA No. 397 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.397 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095.
THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)1) 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095. …APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. DILIP.M, ADV. A/W SRI. RAVIRAJ.Y.V., ADV.)
AND:
M/S. TYCO FIRE AND SECURITY INDIA PVT LTD, D-601, RMZ CONTENNIAL, KUNDALAHALLI MAIN ROAD,
Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40541-DB ITA No. 397 of 2023
BENGALURU-560048. PAN: AABCT 0087C …RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30/03/2022 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO. 3363/BANG/2018 AND CORRIGENDUM DATED 02/11/2022 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
- 3 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40541-DB ITA No. 397 of 2023
ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
Heard Sri. Dilip.M., learned counsel along with Sri. Raviraj.Y.V., learned counsel for the appellants/Revenue and Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee.
The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) questioning the correctness and legality of order dated 30.3.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short ‘Appellate Authority’) in IT(TP)A.No.3363/Bang/2018 for the assessment year 2014-15, raising the following substantial questions of law: 1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in nature in excluding comparable namely, M/s.Persistent Systems Ltd in Corrigendum order which is not permitted in law"?
- 4 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40541-DB ITA No. 397 of 2023
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal excluding comparable's namely, Persistent Systems Ltd without considering that companies are similar to that of assessee and TPO had satisfied qualitative and quantitative tests to consider them as comparable's, the same has resulted in passing a perverse order in nature"?
Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal should not be entertained at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the matter falls within the exceptions under the aforesaid Circular dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024.
- 5 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40541-DB ITA No. 397 of 2023
In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue. However, the question of law is kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding.
Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE
Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE
SMJ List No.: 3 Sl No.: 10