Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.573 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD
BANGALORE. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
CIRCLE-11(5), RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. KEANE INDIA LTD., (ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF KEANE INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD., (NOW MERGED WITH KEANE INDIA LTD.,) BANGALORE-560030. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S. SHARATH, ADV., FOR SRI. CHYTHANYA K.K. ADV.,) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 21-06-2013
2 PASSED IN ITA NO.37/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.37/BANG/2011 DATED 21-06-2013 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Mr.Sharath Sachidanand, learned counsel for the assessee. 2. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2007-08. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 01/04.2014 to consider the following substantial questions of law:
3 i. Whether the Tribunal on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law was correct in holding that, the assessee's activity of human resources services are IT enabled services, when the assessee was only making available the data base of qualified IT personnel and entitled to deduction u/s. 10A of the Act and recorded a perverse finding? ii. Whether the Tribunal on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law was correct in holding that the assessee's activity of human resources services are IT enabled services, when the assessee was only making available the data base of qualified IT personnel and entitled to deduction u/s. 10A of the Act and recorded a perverse finding? 3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submits that the substantial questions of law framed in this appeal have already been answered against the revenue by judgment dated 12.11.2020 passed in ITA No.544/2013. The aforesaid
4 submission could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue. 4. For the reasons assigned by a Bench of this Court in judgment dated 12.11.2020 passed in ITA No.544/2013, the substantial questions of law framed in this appeal are answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV