INFOSYS BPO LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
ITA/236/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01027019201606 December 2017Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Supreme Court had already ruled in favor of the appellant in a similar case. Therefore, the impugned order of the ITAT was set aside.

What were the facts?

Infosys BPO Limited appealed to the High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal raised questions of law concerning the assessment year 2006-2007.

What were the issues?

The appeal concerned substantial questions of law that had been decided by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.

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.236/2016

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 6TH 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.236/2016

BETWEEN :

INFOSYS BPO LIMITED BUILDING NO.48, 4TH FLOOR NO.26/3, 26/4 AND 26/6 ELECTRONICS CITY, HOSUR ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 100 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY MR.P.PRAKASH, PRINCIPAL CORPORATE TAXATION

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI T.SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE)

AND :

1.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1)

(ERSTWHILE THE ASSISTANT

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CIRCLE 11(4)

BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT. ROAD

KORAMANGALA

BANGALORE – 560 095

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3

BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD

KORAMANGALA

BANGALORE – 560 095

ITA No.236/2016

-2-

3.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF AMENDED AS PER

INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 11(4) ORDER DATED

BANGALORE, BMTC BUILDING 17.08.2016

80 FT. ROAD, KORMANGALA

BANGALORE – 560 095 ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND & SRI DILIP, ADVOCATES)

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 09.12.2015 PASSED BY THE ITAT, “B” BENCH BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1004/BANG/2014

FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007.

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

JUDGMENT

Ag.CJ (Oral):

Sri K.V.Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submits that the questions raised in this appeal are answered in favour of the appellant by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC)]. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.12.2015 (Annexure-E) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘‘B’’ Bench, Bangalore in

ITA No.236/2016

-3-

ITA.No.1004/Bang/2014 is set aside. The appeal is accordingly allowed.

Appeal allowed.

Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

More judgments on Section 260-A

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →