Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
- 1 -
ITA No. 16 of 2020 C/W ITA No. 17 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2020 C/W INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 17 OF 2020
IN I.T.A No.16 OF 2020 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) PRESENT ADDRESS: JCIT SPECIAL RANGE - 2 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD KORMANGALA BENGALURU 560 095 …APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI. M. DILIP, STANDING COUNSEL FOR SHRI. K.V. ARAVIND, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL)
Digitally signed by YASHODHA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
ITA No. 16 of 2020 C/W ITA No. 17 of 2020
AND : CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT LTD BRIGADE SOUTH PARADE NO.10, M.G. ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 PAN: AACCC 4552A …RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI. NAGESHWAR RAO AND SHRI. K. MALLAHARAO, ADVOCATES) . . . .
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.06.2019 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.688/BANG/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A NO.688/BANG/2016 DATED 07.06.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ANNEXURE-D AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE DRP CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-2, BENGALURU AND ETC.
IN I.T.A No.17 OF 2020 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) PRESENT ADDRESS: JCIT SPECIAL RANGE - 2 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU 560 095. …APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI. M. DILIP, STANDING COUNSEL FOR SHRI. K.V. ARAVIND, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL)
- 3 -
ITA No. 16 of 2020 C/W ITA No. 17 of 2020
AND : CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT LTD BRIGADE SOUTH PARADE #10, M.G. ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 PAN: AACCC 4552A …RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI. NAGESHWAR RAO AND SHRI. K. MALLAHARAO, ADVOCATES) . . . .
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.06.2019 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.219/BANG/2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-2014, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A NO. 219/BANG/2018 DATED 07.06.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-2014 ANNEXURE-D AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE DRP CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-2, BENGALURU AND ETC.
THESE ITAs, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These appeals directed against the order dated June 7, 2019 in IT(TP)A No. 688/Bang/2016 and IT(TP)A No.219/Bang/2018 respectively passed by the ITAT, have been admitted to consider following questions of law: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances on the case, the Tribunal is right in remanding the matter back to Assessing Authority with regard to depreciation claim on leased assets in the hands of the assessee made by directing the Assessing Authority to examine that terms and conditions
- 4 -
ITA No. 16 of 2020 C/W ITA No. 17 of 2020
set of in the agreements entered into by the assessee are similar to terms and conditions set out in the agreements set out in the case of ICDS Ltd Vs. CIT in CA No.3282 of 2008 (Decision of Hon’ble Apex Court) and if found similar then to allow depreciation despite the fact that as mentioned by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, the assessee failed to produce the details of assets returned on maturity/expiry of leased period and thus failed to prove that the agreements were actually followed by the assessee in carrying out its business of leasing?
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances on the case directing the Assessing Authority to re-consider the claim of depreciation on leased assets in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court without appreciating that the Hon’ble Apex Court had remanded the matter back to Assessing Authority for examination of terms and conditions of agreement entered into by assessee in said case but had not given liberty to Assessing Authority to verify whether the assessee has already implemented the terms and conditions which has now been done by Tribunal?
At the outset, Shri. Nageshwar Rao, learned Advocate for the assessee submitted that ITAT’s order impugned in these appeals have been given effect to by the Assessing Officer by passing order dated 22.11.2021 for A.Y. 2011-12 and order dated 17.05.2022 for A.Y. 2012-13 and in view of the said orders, these appeals have been rendered infructuous.
- 5 -
ITA No. 16 of 2020 C/W ITA No. 17 of 2020
Shri. M. Dilip, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue does not dispute the same so far as the Assessing Officer passing orders giving effect to ITAT’s order, but contended that the remand order was for a limited purpose for comparing the agreement with the one considered in ICDS Ltd. Vs. CIT1 case. Therefore this Court may consider these appeals on merits.
We have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records.
It is not in dispute that after ITAT passed the impugned orders under challenge, the Assessing Officer has given effect to said orders. The said orders are not under challenge in these appeals. Therefore we are persuaded to accept the contention urged by Shri. Nageshwar Rao that in the absence of any challenge to Assessing Officer’s orders giving effect to ITAT’s orders, appeals have been rendered infructuous.
1 Civil Appeal No.3282 of 2008
- 6 -
ITA No. 16 of 2020 C/W ITA No. 17 of 2020
Appeals are accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE
SPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41