PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S STERLING COMMERCE

PDF · subscribers
ITA/448/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01033792201710 December 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,K.NATARAJAN3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court accepted the submission of the appellant's counsel. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department appealed an ITAT order. The department's counsel conceded that the substantial question of law was covered by a Supreme Court judgment.

What were the issues?

Whether the substantial question of law in the appeal is covered by a Supreme Court judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

ON THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.448 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(1)(2), BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S STERLING COMMERCE SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED C/O IBM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.12, SUBRAMANYA ARCADE, I, 3RD FLOOR, BANNERGATTA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 029, PAN: AAACY1364L. ... RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 20.01.2017 PASSED IN IT (TP)A NO.439/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010- 2011, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, PRAYING TO; DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE COURT AS DEEMED FIT; (a) SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 20.01.2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, BENGALURU, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO.IT(TP)A NO.439/BANG/2015, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL; AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

*****

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellants submit that the substantial question of law that arise for consideration in the instant appeal is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-III VS. HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,

3 (2018) 93 TAXMANN.COM 33 (SC). Hence, he pleads that the present appeal be dismissed.

2.

The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is placed on record.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

Sd/- JUDGE

JUDGE

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →