THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOOGLE INDIA PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/465/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01036231201719 June 2018Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeals filed by the Revenue against the interlocutory orders have become infructuous. Therefore, the appeals are disposed of as such.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against interlocutory orders of the ITAT that extended stay periods for the assessee. While these appeals were pending, the ITAT decided the main appeals filed by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether appeals against interlocutory orders of the ITAT are maintainable when the main appeals have been decided. Whether the Revenue's appeals have become infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(2A),Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2018

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

I.T.A. No.465/2017 c/w I.T.A. No.466/2017

IN I.T.A.No.465/2017:

BETWEEN :

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIT (A), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANAGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

2.

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, RANGE-1, 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANAGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.)

AND :

M/S. GOOGLE INDIA PVT. LTD., 4TH FLOOR, OLD MADRAS ROAD BENGALURU-560016.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI PRASHANTH SHIVADASS, ADV. FOR SRI ADITYA V. BHAT, ADV.)

The Commissioner of Income-tax, CIT(A) & another Vs. M/s. Google India Pvt. Ltd.,

2/4

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER PASSED IN S.P.NO.74/BANG/2017 (IN ITA NO.1190/BANG/2014), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-2014 PRAYING TO 1. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. 2. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN SP NO.74/BANG/2017 (IN ITA NO.1190/BANG/2014) DATED 31/03/2017. 3. TO PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

IN I.T.A.No.466/2017:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIT (A), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.)

AND :

M/S. GOOGLE INDIA PVT. LTD., No.3, RMZ INFINITY, TOWER E, 4TH FLOOR, OLD MADRAS ROAD BENGALURU-560016.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI PRASHANTH SHIVADASS, ADV. FOR SRI ADITYA V. BHAT, ADV.)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER PASSED IN S.P.NO.256/BANG/2016 (IN ITA NO.1190/BANG/2014), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-2014 PRAYING TO 1.

The Commissioner of Income-tax, CIT(A) & another Vs. M/s. Google India Pvt. Ltd.,

3/4

FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. 2. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN SP NO.256/BANG/2016 (IN ITA NO.1190/BANG/2014) DATED 23/12/2016. 3. TO PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, Dr. VINEET KOTHARI, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

Mr. K.V.Aravind, Adv. for Appellants - Revenue Mr. Prashanth Shivadass, Adv. for Mr.Aditya V.Bhat, Respondent - Assessee

Learned Counsel at the Bar had brought to our notice that the present Appeals have been filed by the Revenue arising from the interlocutory order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on stay applications filed by the Respondent-Assessee, extending the period of stay since the appeal itself could not be decided within the statutory period for which stay could be granted by the learned Tribunal u/s. 254 (2A) of the Act.

The Commissioner of Income-tax, CIT(A) & another Vs. M/s. Google India Pvt. Ltd.,

4/4

2.

The impugned order was passed by the learned Tribunal on Stay Applications on 31.03.2017 in ITA No.465/2017 and 23.12.2016 in ITA No.466/2017, but now during the pendency of the present Appeals before this Court, the main appeals also have been decided recently by the learned Tribunal on 11.05.2018. The copy of the Order passed by the learned Tribunal disposing of the Appeals of the Assessee are placed on record.

In view of the aforesaid, the present Appeals filed by the Revenue arising from interlocutory order passed by the Tribunal have been rendered infructuous and the same are accordingly disposed of as infructuous. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE ln

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 →