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.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2014
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.493 OF 2013
BETWEEN :
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD
BANGALORE
THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(4)
RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BANGALORE
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.)
AND :
M/s. IKANOS COMMUNICATION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED 3RD FLOOR, CORPORATE MILLER NO.332/1, THIMMAIAH ROAD VASANTHNAGAR BANGALORE – 560 052
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.T.SURYANARAYANA, ADV. FOR M/s. KING & PARTRIDGE, ADVS.) ---
This appeal is filed under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 24.5.2013 passed in ITA No.1171/Bang/2011, for the assessment year 2006-07 & 2008-09 praying to formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein and etc.
This appeal coming on for Admission this day, N.KUMAR J., delivered the following:
ORDER
The revenue has preferred this appeal against the order dated 24.5.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore.
In this appeal, the substantial question of law that arise for consideration is as under: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances and in law the Appellate Authorities were correct in holding that the communication charges and expenditure incurred in foreign currency excluded from export turnover in terms of explanation to Section 10A of the Act has to be reduced from total turnover, contrary to the provisions of Section 10A of the Act?”
This Court, in the case of ‘TATA ELXSI LIMITED’ [349 ITR 98 (KAR)] has answered the said question in
3 favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue submitted that against the said judgment, a special leave petition is filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and infact it is now part heard. Therefore, he submits that if the Court is not inclined to admit this appeal, a direction may be issued to the Assessing Authority to proceed to pass a consequential order only after the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Section 260-1A of the Income Tax Act.
We deem it appropriate to accept the said submission and accordingly, we pass the following:
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed as the question of law raised in this appeal is already answered in favour of the assessee. However, the consequential order to be passed by the Assessing Authority would be only after the
4 disposal of the appeal which is now pending before the Apex Court.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE