PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SASKEN COMMUNICATION

PDF · subscribers
ITA/263/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01031078201713 December 2017Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged that a key legal question was decided against the appellants in a prior ruling. The remaining questions were deferred to another related appeal.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department appealed an ITAT order. The High Court noted that one of the substantial questions of law was already decided against the appellants in a previous case.

What were the issues?

Whether the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal are valid and require consideration, particularly in light of previous High Court judgments.

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.

ITA No.263/2017

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.263/2017

BETWEEN :

1.

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA BANGALORE

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

OF INCOME TAX

CIRCLE 6(1)(1)

BANGALORE

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND :

M/S SASKEN COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED NO.139/25, DOMLUR RING ROAD DOMLUR, BANGALORE – 560 071 ...RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.10.2016 PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A NO.376/BANG/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011.

ITA No.263/2017

-2-

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Ag.CJ (Oral):

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that question No.1 raised in this appeal is answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [(2012) 349 ITR 98 (Karn)]. He further submits that question Nos.2 and 3 may be kept open to be considered in ITA.No.264/2017. Accordingly, question Nos.2 and 3 are kept open to be considered in the aforesaid appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed.

Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

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 →