Excellence Private Limited v. The Commissioner Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF MARCH 2021 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI I. T. A. NO.411 OF 2015 BETWEEN: M/S. IBM INDIA PRIVATE LTD., SUBRAMANYA ARCHADE, NO.12, BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 029 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SHRI AMIT SHARMA, S/O SRI JAGADISH CHANDER SHARMA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS. ...APPELLANT (BY SMT. H VANI, ADVOCATE) AND: DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 6 FLOOR, R P BHAVAN, NO.14/3, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU -560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX APPEAL ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 17.04.2015 PASSED IN ITA Nos.1491 AND 1492/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013 PRAYING TO (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.04.2015 OF THE ITAT PASSED IN ITA Nos.1491 AND 1492/BANG/2013 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mrs. H.Vani, learned counsel for the assessee. Mr. K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the Revenue. 2. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 17.04.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2012-13. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the findings of the Appellate Authorities were perverse to the effect that the authorities have held that the payments made by the Appellant to IBM Singapore towards purchase of software amounts to "royalty" under the Act read with the India-Singapore DTAA and thus liable for tax deduction at source? 2 . Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellant Tribunal was justified in upholding the orders passed by the respondent under Section 201(1) and Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the Appellant as an assessee-in-default?" 3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue involved in this appeal has been put to rest in view of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.8733-8734/2018 between ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER, vide order dated 02.03.2021 and the issue involved in this appeal has been answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue was unable to dispute the aforesaid submission. 5. For the reasons assigned in the aforesaid judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 8733-8734/2018 vide order dated 02.03.2021, the substantial questions of law involved in this appeal are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. In the result, the order dated 17.04.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is hereby quashed. In the result, the appeal is allowed. SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE RD