PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 vs. M/S. MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/704/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01051811201720 November 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,K.NATARAJAN3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the submission of the Revenue's counsel that the questions of law were covered by existing judgments. Based on this submission, the Court proceeded to pass its order.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Revenue's counsel submitted that the substantial questions of law were covered by Supreme Court and High Court judgments.

What were the issues?

Whether the substantial questions of law arising in the appeal were covered by pronouncements of the Supreme Court and the High Court.

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(2)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 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.704 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU.

2.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-12(1), BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.149-B, EPIP, 1STS PHASE, INDUSTRIAL AREA, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU, PAN: AABCM 9868J. ... RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 08.03.2017 PASSED IN MP NO.3/BANG/2011 IN IT(TP) A NO.1247/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO; DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORUMLATED BY THE HON’BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 08.03.2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, BENGALURU, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE’S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN MP NO.3/BANG/2011 IN IT(TP) A NO.1247/BANG/2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 2008 AND 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:

ORDER

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the first substantial question of law that arises 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., (2018) 93 TAXMANN.COM 33 (SC)

3 and the second substantial question of law is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU VS. SOFTBRANDS INDIA (P) LTD., (2018) 94 TAXMANN.COM 426 (KARNATAKA).

2.

The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant 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 →