Case LawHigh Court › Ita/143/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of...

Ita/143/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Abb Global Industries

High Court 24 Sep 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Ita/143/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Abb Global Industries
Date of order
24 Sep 2024
Assessment year(s)
2008-2009, 2008-09
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Ita/143/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Abb Global Industries, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.

Issue: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in excluding certain comparables chosen by the Transfer Pricing Officer on the basis of functional dissimilarity by following its earlier judgment?” 4.

Decision: In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

Digitally signedbyMARIGANGAIAHPREMAKUMARILocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA NC: 2024:KHC:39749-DBITA No. 143 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 143 OF 2018 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT (A), 5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU 56 095. CIT (A), 5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU 56 095. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCELE-11(1), PRESENT ADDRESS CIRCLE-1(1)(1), 2 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU -560 095. CIRCELE-11(1), PRESENT ADDRESS CIRCLE-1(1)(1), 2 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU -560 095. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI N., ADV.) AND: M/S. ABB GLOBAL INDUSTRIES AND SERVICES LTD., 2 FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, NO.49, RACE CURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 24/08/2017 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.1612/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009, PRAYING TO I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:39749-DB ABOVE, II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A NO. 1612/BANG/2012 DATED 24/08/2017 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE DRP CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU (VIDE ANNEXURE-D) AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Heard the learned counsel Sri.Sushal Tiwari, for appellants/Revenue. 2. The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) questioning the correctness and legality of order dated 24.08.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in IT(TP)A.No.1612/Bang/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09. NC: 2024:KHC:39749-DB ITA No. 143 of 2018 3. This Court, admitted the appeal on 07.10.2019 to consider the following substantial questions of law: “1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has erred in directing the Transfer Pricing Officer to exclude certain comparables having RPT transactions more than 15%? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in excluding certain comparables chosen by the Transfer Pricing Officer on the basis of functional dissimilarity by following its earlier judgment?” 4. It is noticedthat the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal would not be maintainable at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the matter falls within the exceptions under the aforesaid Circular dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024. 6. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue. However, the question of law is kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE MPK CT:bms List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0
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