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

I IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DAThD THIS THE 15Th DAY OF MARCH 2012 PRESENT THE HOflLE MR1 AJSTLCE IL KUMAR AND THE HOflLE MW JtJflCE RAVI MAL1MATH ffANO302f 2011 Betcrn The Commissioner of moomewtax L’IU, JSS Towen BSK UI Stager Bangalon 2 The IncomewTaz Officer TUB Ward C R Builchng Navemigar HuSK 3 The Income Tax Office, LIV (TUB) JSS Town BW TZT Stag BataIore ALIANt (By Sn M V SesIachsIa for K VSrastid, Advecate

0Ux 2 I I S z And: Karnataka Power Traranñaeion Corporation Ltd, u Major Worb sbn Vidvut Nages Karwar Road Hubli 580024 RESNDENT I (BySrLCthanya.KK.,Adwcate) 2 ifA is filed under Section 260A of LT.Act, 1%1 ning out of Order dated 18.03.2011 passed in 8 ITA No.232/Bang/2010, for the Assessnt year 2008- , aying that this Hon’ble Court y he pleased to formulate the substanthi queations of law stated therein. This ifA oming on for this day tKt.J, delirered the following: This appeal is the renue. The substantial questions of law that arise for consideration in this appeal are as uttder. (1)Whether the 7Nbunal was right in spiluthg up the mntrai4 which, aeccrdbtg to the revenue, was one ALE? of the composite contract tnto parts sisch as part of the contra attributabt

3 to the ualue of the materials frwolued in the exeadion ofthe work and otherpwt 8 of the nfra such as th’il works and taking the view that tax was required to be deducted at sam only in respect of the work pafl of the contract and not mateflalpan ofthe contra? (2$Thether the lWbunal wasjustified in concluding that interest under Section 201(lAflfthe Income Tax Act 3 1961 le nor levtable, as the assessee was not liable to make any deductions in respect of the value of the material part of the contract thamigh the contract was one of whole confrwS’ 2. Thin Court had an occosion to consider the apah where the said quatois were involved in the case of The Coawd.Snn aflnaw Ta and c,thars vs Kaaka Paver TransmissIon Corporation limited diwsed of on awn date arid has answered the said suheantial quatiom of law in bnr of the asseasee and against the renue.

waI r nnanaiwflflifl wwci vi SAMNAFAIIA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAICA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT I; CI 1*. I a C 0> 1 P1