Case LawHigh Court › Ita/116/2019 Of The Principal Commission...

Ita/116/2019 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Navigant Bpm (India) Private Limited

High Court 11 Nov 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/116/2019 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Navigant Bpm (India) Private Limited
Date of order
11 Nov 2019
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/116/2019 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Navigant Bpm (India) Private Limited, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 20TH KARTHIKA, 1941 ITA.No.116 OF 2019 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23-10-2018 IN ITA 57/COCH/2016 OFI.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: M/S. NAVIGANT BPM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,2ND FLOOR, PAMBA BUILDING, TECHNOPARK CAMPUS, TRIVANDRUM- 695581. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI R1 BY ADV. SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.KURYAN THOMAS R1 BY ADV. SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON11.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. &ANU SIVARAMAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- I.T. Appeal No. 116 OF 2019 ------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11[th] DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019J U D G M E N T Abdul Rehim, J.: Standing counsel for Government of India (Taxes) had filedmemo praying for withdrawal of the appeal, based on the latestlitigation policy of the Income Tax Department. 2.Accordingly, permission is granted to the appellant forwithdrawal of the appeal. The appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. 3.The Registry shall make refund of the court fee to theextent admissible under the relevant statutory provisions. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE AMG Sd/- ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE ATRUE COPY OF THE ORDER U/S 143(3) R.W.S 92CA R.W.S 144C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 16.12.2015.144C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 16.12.2015. ANNEXURE BTRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL-2, BANGALORE DATED 23.11.2015.RESOLUTION PANEL-2, BANGALORE DATED 23.11.2015. ANNEXURE CTRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IN IT(TP)ANO.57/COCH/2016, FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2011-12 DATED 23.10.2018.IT(TP)ANO.57/COCH/2016, FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2011-12 DATED 23.10.2018.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan