THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. NIKE INC
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the assessment orders. This was because in a connected matter, it was held that the assessee had no tax liability, making the exercise of power under Section 263 unjustified.
What were the facts?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had set aside assessment orders passed consequent to an order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The High Court was considering an appeal against this ITAT order.
What were the issues?
Whether the exercise of power under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act was justified when the assessee was found to have no tax liability in a connected matter.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITA 345/2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH 2013
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
INCOME-TAX APPEAL No.345/2009
BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,
INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,
NO.14/3A, 6TH FLOOR,
RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BANGALORE – 560 001.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,
NO.14/3A, 6TH FLOOR,
RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BANGALORE – 560 001.
… APPELLANTS
(By SRI K.V.ARAVIND, Advocate)
ITA 345/2009
2 AND:
NIKE Inc., INDIA LIAISON OFFICE, 49/1, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.
… RESPONDENT
(By Sri KUMAR & KUMAR, Sr. COUNSEL ALONG WITH Sri T.SURYANARAYANA, Adv. FOR M/s. KING & PATRIDGE)
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 02.01.2009 PASSED IN I.T.A NO.1206/BNG/2008, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-2003, PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, ETC.
THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, N.KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
Consequent to the order passed under Section 263 of the Act, assessment orders have been passed. The Tribunal was justified in setting aside the said order as in the connected matter it is held that there
ITA 345/2009
3 is no liability to pay tax on the part of the assessee and therefore exercise of power under Section 263 was not justified. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
dh*
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026