THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CITRIX R AND D INDIA PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/345/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC01040169201927 September 2024Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal, granting the revenue liberty to revive it if the matter falls within exceptions to CBDT circulars on tax effect. The substantial questions of law were kept open for future adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order concerning the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal raised substantial questions of law regarding the selection of comparable companies, the treatment of foreign exchange transactions, and the disallowance of belated EPF/ESI remittances.

What were the issues?

The key issues involved the validity of comparable selections in transfer pricing, the nature of foreign exchange transactions for comparability analysis, and the disallowance of belated statutory remittances.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40397-DB ITA No. 345 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH 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.345 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (A), 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2 (1) (1), 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095. …APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. DILIP M, ADVOCATE A/W SRI. RAVI RAJ Y.V, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40397-DB ITA No. 345 of 2019

AND:

M/S. CITRIX R AND D INDIA PVT. LTD., PRESTIGE DYNASTY, GROUND FLOOR, 33/2, ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 049, PAN: AABCN 3639C. …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 31.12.2018 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.592/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 PRAYING TO I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE.

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:40397-DB ITA No. 345 of 2019

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Dilip.M., along with Sri. Raviraj.Y.V., learned counsel for appellants/Revenue and learned counsel Smt.Tanmayee Rajkumar for respondent/assessee.

2.

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 31.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in IT(TP)A.No.592/Bang/2016 for the assessment year 2011-12.

3.

This Court, admitted the appeal on 24.10.2019 to consider the following substantial questions of law:

"i. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that M/s.R.S.Software Pvt. Ltd., and M/s.Acropetal Technologies Ltd., cannot be taken as comparable,

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40397-DB ITA No. 345 of 2019

when it satisfies all the qualitative and quantitative filters adopted by the Transfer Pricing Officer?

ii. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the right in law in seeking exact comparability while searching for comparable companies of the assessee under TNMM method whereas requirement of law and international jurisprudence require seeking similar comparable companies?

iii. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the foreign exchange transactions are to be considered as operating in nature, when the Rule 10B(2)(d) stipulates that the net profit margin realized by the taxpayer in the international transaction shall alone be computed for comparability analysis under TNMM?

iv. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in confirming the finding of the DRP that foreign exchange is operative in nature by following its earlier order which has not reached finality?

v. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside disallowance of belated remittance of EPF / ESI by

- 5 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40397-DB ITA No. 345 of 2019

following judgment of this Hon'ble Court in case of M/s.Essae Teroka Ltd.,?"

4.

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.

5.

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.

6.

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

- 6 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40397-DB ITA No. 345 of 2019

kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

SMJ List No.: 4 Sl No.: 8

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →