Ita/1065/2017 Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. M/S. Menzies Aviation Bobba (B'lore) Pvt Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURUDATED THIS THE 25[TH|]DAY OF JANUARY 2071|PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’‘’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASW AILT.A. NO.1065 OF 2017 BETWEEN: 1.|PR, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4. 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE. 2.|THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE. .... APPELLANTS (BY MR. E.R. INDRAKUMAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR| MR. E.1. SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND* M/S. MENZIES AVIATIONBOBBA (BLORE) PVT. LTD.,PLOT NO.C-041, BANGALOREINTERNATIONAL AIRPORTDEVANAHALLI BANGALORE-560300 PAN: AAECM 6862D. (BY MR. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR|MR. M. LAVA, ADV.,) .., RESPONDENT THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. J6O0-A OF INCOME TAXACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 12.07.2017 PASSEDIN ITA NO.1001/BANG/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13, PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW, AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BEFORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SETASIDE THE COMMON APPELLATE ORDER DATED 12-0/-20L/.PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘C. BENCH, BENGALURU, IN APPEALPROCEEDINGS NO ITA NO.1001/BANG/2016 FOR ASSESSMENTYEAR 2012-13, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL AND TO GRANTSUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, | ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: | JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has|been filed by the revenue. The subject matter of the appealpertains to the Assessment Year 2012-13. Tne appeal wasadmitted by a Bencn of this Court vide order dated|05.11.2018 on the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether, on the _ facts and in_ tcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was|justified in law in nolaing tnat the BIAL Is a.Statutory Body when it cannot be considered|as it is a corporate body in which KSIIDCits holding a mere 13% share in BIAL registered|under Companies Act and it falls to satisfy therequirements of Section 40IA(4) of the|[.T.Act? 2D.Whetner, Of)thefactsandIn|tnecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal Isjustified in law in holding that the cargo|nandling contract entered into witn BIAL by|assessee is witn statutory boay satisfying|condition set forth in Section 80IA(4) when|BIAL is only a company wnose motive only|making profit and is only a instrument of|State?. 2. For the reasons assigned by us in ITA No.186/2016.c/w ITA No.262/2014, the substantial questions of lawframed in this appeal are answered against the revenue andin favour of the assessee. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/-JUDGE Sd/-JUDGE