THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD

IN THE mGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. AT BANGALORE DATED fifis THE 13Th BAY OF irnCH 2012 NT flf HON’BLE MRJUSTICE N. ICUMAR AND THE HOflLE MR. JUSTICE PA’!! MALIMATH ffANO286/2011 Between I The ComrnIssritr ofIzrnontax, L’IU, JSS Town, BEK. III Stage, Bangalore. 2. The Incozn&Tax Officer, ‘its ward, Ferox Thiojibliai c•onim.erci• Complex q•••gi Hospital, BA Amlrdica. Road, Beaunr 5’•• 001 3. The Income Tax Officer, LTIJ, fitS), JSS Town, BSK IN Sage, Bangalore. By S MV)ack’a thr KMSraviaI, Adcate)

t Ant Karuataka Power Transmission Corwran LM., S S S Baralore Major Worla Dawn Nehru Nagar, Belgaum 587102 RK8NDENT (By Sri. Ct1wiya K K9 Admte) This hA is filed under SectEn 2A of LT.Act, 11 niz out of order dated 17032011 passed in hA No3/BamJ2010, for the Assessment yr 20O7 08, praying t this Hon’ble Court tray he paed te formulate the substandal questions of law steted. a This I’M is ming on for Heark this days NJLUM J dellwred the fohiowing: This apl is rnue Tie substantel questions of law Qw.t arise for consideration in this appral are as under (1)Whether the Tribunal was nqht in splitting tp the oofl which, cuxiordmg to the rwerwe, was one ALS

S of the composite contract 3 into pa sudz pwt of the contract attributable tea’ the value of the materials involved in eniastlon ofthe work and otherpart of the confront such as thU works and taking the viau that tar was required to be deducted at sourve on4j in respect of the work pan of the contract and not mflalpa ofthe contract? 42)W7zether the Trthurszl was jhst(fted in ccnch4lng that interest under Section 201(M) of the Inanne Tar Aa, 1961 not Leviable, as the assessee was not liable td make any deductions In respect of the value of the matrriat pan of the contr though the contact was one of whole corJrud?& 2 This Court had an occawen to cannier the appea where the said qiatlons were hnt in the case of The Camn*ntener ofIncome flax and others •a Zantcaka Power Thanawtsaton Cosporatton Limited disposed of on ewn ate and has answered

4 the said substantial queatiom of law in fawur of tir assas and aganzt the rwenue 4 I ‘ftr&re, 1k,wii the aforesaid judgment, this appeal is also dismiss. Sd/ JUDGE Sd/ JUDGE