Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2013 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D V SHYLENDRA KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B SREENIVASE GOWDA Income Tax Appeal Nos.286-287 of 2012
BETWEEN:
M/S IBM INDIA PRIVATE LTD., SUBRMANYA ARCHADE NO.12, BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD BANGALORE – 560 029 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. ANITA SANGHI D/O SRI MAHABIR LOSALKA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
… APPELLANT
[By Smt Vani H, Adv.]
AND:
INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) WARD-1(2), R P BHAVAN, NO.14/3, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE – 560 001
… RESPONDENT
[By Sri K V Aravind, Adv.]
THESE APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER DATED 27.03.2012 PASSED IN ITA NOS. 297 & 298/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2005-06 AND ETC.,
2 THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, D V SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
Mr.K.V. Aravind, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue, takes notice for the respondent.
With the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal.
Smt. Vani, learned counsel appearing the appellant and Mr.K.V. Aravind, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, both submit that the substantial questions of law raised in these appeals are covered by a judgment of this Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER Vs. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.LTD., reported in [2012] 345 ITR 494 (Karn).
In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the assessee and the learned counsel for the revenue, these appeals are also dismissed on the same lines as indicated in the case of SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
3 CO.LTD., the questions raised in these appeals are answered accordingly and against the assessee.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE
NG*