THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION

I IN ThE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANOALORE ThD THIS THE 15Th DAY OF MARCH 2012 PRESENT fl HaUtE MRJUCE L KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAW MALIMATH ITA.NO.332 /2011 Bean Commissioner ofItax, L’flJ, JSS Towers, 85K in star, Baa1ora 2. The Ime Tax Offer ThS Ward Akayakar Bhavan Staff Road% Fort Belhry. 3. The Incom&Tsx LIV DS) JSS Towen BSK in Stage, Ba%an. (By Sri. MY.Sesbachala for LV.Aravin& Adncetc)

‘4 Ast Karnaa1 Power treramnon Corration LM., Major Worn (8) DMslon, vansgere. RESi<)NDENT (By Sri. ChytInya KJC, Adtcate) Thh I’M is filed under Satkn 2&)A of LT.Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 0442011 ssed in I’M No.261/BanuJ2OlO, for the Asseasment year 2009- 10, praying t1t this Hon’ble Ceurt ny pleased to formulate the substantial questions of law stated TM co on for Heating this day, NJCUMAR 4, delivered tfr following: ann This appeal is the rewnue. The substantial quaom of law that arise for coriderathn in appeal are as urger (1)Whether the 2’Wbunai was ht in splitting up the cxmtract, which, to the rwerute, was one MB of the composite conbrfl into parts suck as port of the contr attnbutable

3 to the value ofthe maat& thuolved lit the execution ofthe work and otherpart of the nfraa such as civil worn and — theu that tar was required to be deducted at source only in respect of the work peat of the cnntract and not maNalpart ofthe wnnP (2)Whether the Thbunal was justffled In n&sdIr that Interest under Section 201(IA) of the Income Tax Ac( 1961 Is not leviable, as the assessee was not lle to make asuj deductions in respect ofthe value of the material pafl of the cnnfracç though the contract was one of whole contract?’ 2 Th.h Court had an ocoaslon to oonsider appeak wre ttm said quations were involved in the case of The Cowtndadaner ofIWcome Thx and atlwra a Xamkm Fmn fraasmtsston Cmpwatta IAadted diposed of on even date and has arawered the said suhten1 qutiom of w in favour of the matte and agatt t& retenue

Li txl I