THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ABB GLOBAL INDUSTRIES

PDF · subscribers
ITA/143/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01034795201824 September 2024Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 09/2024, making the appeal not maintainable. The appeal was disposed of with liberty to revive if exceptions applied.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning transfer pricing for Assessment Year 2008-09. The appeal raised questions about the exclusion of comparables with related party transactions and functional dissimilarity.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable due to low tax effect as per CBDT circulars. Whether the Tribunal erred in excluding comparables based on related party transactions and functional dissimilarity.

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:39749-DB ITA No. 143 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH 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. 143 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT (A), 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU 56 095.

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCELE-11(1), PRESENT ADDRESS CIRCLE-1(1)(1), 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU -560 095. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI N., ADV.)

AND:

M/S. ABB GLOBAL INDUSTRIES AND SERVICES LTD., 2ND FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, NO.49, RACE CURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 24/08/2017 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.1612/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009, PRAYING TO I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39749-DB ITA No. 143 of 2018

ABOVE, II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A NO. 1612/BANG/2012 DATED 24/08/2017 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE DRP CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU (VIDE ANNEXURE-D) AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Sushal Tiwari, for appellants/Revenue.

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 24.08.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in IT(TP)A.No.1612/Bang/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09.

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39749-DB ITA No. 143 of 2018

3.

This

Court,

admitted the appeal on 07.10.2019 to consider the following substantial questions of law: “1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has erred in directing the Transfer Pricing Officer to exclude certain comparables having RPT transactions more than 15%?

2.

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in excluding certain comparables chosen by the Transfer Pricing Officer on the basis of functional dissimilarity by following its earlier judgment?”

4.

It is noticed that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal would not be maintainable 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

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39749-DB ITA No. 143 of 2018

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 kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

MPK CT:bms List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0

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 →