THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION

PDF · subscribers
ITA/101/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01012985201317 June 2013Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.S.INDRAKALA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal, acknowledging that a previous judgment by another division bench of the same court had already decided the issue in favor of the assessee. The court noted that the revenue was free to pursue the matter further in higher courts.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that granted relief to the assessee. The core issue was whether a contract for erection, installation, and civil works of power lines and stations was a composite contract, and if TDS was deductible on material purchases.

What were the issues?

Whether TDS was deductible on payments made for materials in a composite contract for power line and station works. Whether the present appeal was covered by a previous High Court judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D. V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.S. INDRAKALA

ITA NO.101/2013

BETWEEN:

1.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU, JSS Towers, BSK III Stage, Bangalore.

2.

The Income-Tax Officer, (TDS) LTU, JSS Towers, BSK II Stage, Bangalore.

…APPELLANTS

(By Sri. K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel )

AND:

M/s. Karnataka Power Transmission

Corporation Ltd.,

Major Works Division,

Bangalore Road,

Kolar.

…RESPONDENT … This ITA is filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961, praying to set a side the order dated 19.10.2012, passed in I.T.A. No.158/Bang/2012, for the assessment year 2007-08 and etc.

This ITA coming on for Admission this day, Shylendra Kumar. J., delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

This is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’] against the order passed by the Tribunal allowing the respondent – assessee’s appeal and extending the relief to the assessee.

2.

Sri. K V Aravind, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellants – revenue submits that the question as to whether the contract awarded by the assessee to third party for erection, installation and execution of civil work of power lines and power stations was not composite contract and no TDS was liable to be deducted in respect of payments made by the assessee to the contractors for purchase of materials involved in the said contract etc., is a question which has been answered in favour of the respondent – assessee as per the Judgment dated 15.03.2012 rendered by another division Bench of this court in ITA No.337/2011 in the case of ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. KARNATAKA POWER

3 TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED’ and therefore this question having answered and gone against the appellant – revenue, so far as this court is concerned, this appeal will have to be dismissed as question is now covered as indicated earlier.

3.

However, Sri. K.V. Aravind, learned standing counsel appearing for the revenue submits that this is without prejudice to the stand taken by the revenue that the view taken by this court in the earlier case referred to above is not correct and without prejudice to pursuing the matter before the Supreme Court.

4.

It is open to the appellants – revenue to take such course of action as is available in law, but this appeal is dismissed.

Sd/- Judge

Sd/- Judge

Nsu/-

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 →