PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S UE DEVELOPMENT INDIA PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/98/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01016240202025 September 2024Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal based on a CBDT circular regarding tax effect. The court granted liberty to the revenue to revive the appeal if exceptions applied, keeping the substantial question of law open for future adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order concerning assessment year 2010-11. The core issue involved whether Arm's Length Price (ALP) adjustments could be made on corresponding transactions of associated enterprises when one transaction was already considered at arm's length.

What were the issues?

Whether ALP adjustments can be made on corresponding transactions of associated enterprises if one transaction is already at arm's length, and if the appeal is maintainable given the tax effect and CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 92(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39917-DB ITA No. 98 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH 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. 98 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU.

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -7(1)(1) BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU.

…APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. SANMATHI E.I., ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S. UE DEVELOPMENT INDIA PVT.LTD., NO.116, 702, 7TH FLOOR,

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39917-DB ITA No. 98 of 2021

PRIDE HULKUL BUILDING, LALBAGH ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027. PAN NO.AAACU5091N …RESPONDENT

(RESPONDENT SERVED)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 20/09/2019 PASSED IN ITA NO. 1895/BANG/2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT 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:39917-DB ITA No. 98 of 2021

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

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Sanmathi.E.I., for the 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 20.9.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.1895/Bang/2017 for the assessment year 2010-11.

3.

This Court, admitted the appeal on 22.7.2024 to consider the following substantial question of law: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that in mirror transactions, ALP adjustments cannot be done, i.e., if one transaction is treated as at Arm's Length, no adjustment can be done on the other related corresponding transaction of the associated enterprises without appreciating that this stand

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39917-DB ITA No. 98 of 2021

is against the provisions of section 92(3) of the Act ?”

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

- 5 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39917-DB ITA No. 98 of 2021

kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

SMJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17

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 →