PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S WIPRO GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI I. T. A. NO.950 OF 2017 BETWEEN: 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7

INCOME TAX-7,

BMTC COMPLEX,

KORAMANGALA,

BENGALURU. 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-12(5)

BENGALURU. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANMATHI E I, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S WIPRO GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., PLOT NO.4, KADUGODI INDL AREA, SADARMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 067. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

2 THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX APPEAL ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 21.04.2017, PASSED IN ITA No.40/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-2006, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO: (1) 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 SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED: 21.04.2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'B' BENCH, BENGALURU AS SOUGHT FOR IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE'S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN ITA No.40 /BANG/2011 FOR A.Y 2005-2006 & GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr. E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the assessee. Mr. K.R.Pradeep, learned counsel for the Revenue. 2. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been filed by the Revenue against the judgment dated 21.04.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal pertains

3 to the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. This appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.02.2019, on the following substantial question of law: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in the setting aside the re-allocation of expenses made by assessing authority amounting to Rs.5,18,57,872/- attributable to EHTP-I and EHTP-II units as against the claim of the assessee which was on the basis of the materials available on record which proved that assessee made allocation to make 10A claim to a larger extent"?. 3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue involved in this appeal stands concluded against the Revenue in view of the decision rendered by this Court in ITA No.435/2011 dated 12.06.2020 as well as

4 in ITA No.2834/2005 dated 05.11.2013 and ITA No.125/2018 dated 25.02.2021. 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue was unable to dispute the aforesaid submission. 5. For the reasons assigned in the aforesaid judgments rendered by this Court in ITA Nos.435/2011, 2834/2005 and 125/2018, the substantial question of law involved in this appeal is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE RD