Ita/203/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Bangalore Electricity Supply Co Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20 DAY OF MARCH, 2020 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE M. NAGA PRASANNA ITA NO. 203 OF 20127 BETWEEN: 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,|TDS,HMI BHAVAN,BELLARY ROAD,BANGALORETDS,HMI BHAVAN,BELLARY ROAD,BANGALORE 2.THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER-TDS, WARD-16(1),HM? BAAVAN,BELLARY ROAD,HM? BAAVAN,BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE _ APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO., LTD.,CORPORATE OFFICE,IV FLOOR, K.R. CIRCLE,BANGALORE-560 OO1.RESPONDENT RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SENIOR ADV. A/W SRI.M.LAVAADVOCATE) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE!INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER)PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE!ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITANO.532/Bang/2011 DATED 16/03/2012 AND CONFIRM|THE|ORDER.OF|THE|APPELLATECOMMISSIONERCONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX)OFFICER, TDS, WARD-16(1), BANGALORE, ETC., THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY!ALOK ARADE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-| JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax.Act has been filed by the revenue which was admitted by |a Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.9.2012 by|framing the following the substantial questions of law: .%Whether the Tribunal was correct in holdingtnat the analysis and distripution(SLDC) ofelectricity Dy KPTCL from generation point tothe customers of the assessee_ involvingutilizationof|sopnisticatedmacnineries,tnat the analysis and distripution(SLDC) ofelectricity Dy KPTCL from generation point tothe customers of the assessee_ involvingutilizationof|sopnisticatedmacnineries, involvement of technical expertise, applicationof science, services of engineers, engagementof qualified technicians and trained, skilledpersonnel/manpower does not amount totecnnical services to attract provisions ofSection 194(J) of the Act? ..%Whether tne Tribunal was correct in deletingthe interest levied under Section 201(1A) ofthe Act, for non-deduction of tax at source asrequired under Section 194J of the Act?the interest levied under Section 201(1A) ofthe Act, for non-deduction of tax at source asrequired under Section 194J of the Act? 2. When the matter was taken up today, learnedSenior counsel for the respondent submitted that theaforesaid substantial question of law involved in this)appeal nave already been answered in favour of tneassessee by a Division Bench of this Court vide)judgment dated 22.03.2016 passed in ITA No.438/2012and other connected matters. The aforesaid contention.made by the learned Senior Counsel for the respondent|could not be disputed by the learned counsel for theRevenue. For|the.reaSOn)saforesaidjudgments, the.Substantial questions of law framed in this appeal are answered against the revenue and in favour of the.assessee. In the result the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Psg”*