Ita/279/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. M/S Teleradiology Solutions

IN THB HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 28[th]DAY OF APRIL 2014 PRESENT THER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE AND THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICBK B MANOHAR I.T.A.NO.279/2013 BRITWEBB 1.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IILCENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS,CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORBE-560 OO1. 2.THR DEPUTY COMMISSIONBR OF INCOME TAX|CIRCLE 12(4)|BANGALORE. CIRCLE 12(4)|BANGALORE. _. APPBLLANTS| (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND: M/S. TELERADIOLOGY SOLUTIONS,NO./7g1 VISHVESHWARAIAHINDUSTRIAL AREA, TPL ROAD,OPP. GRAPHITE INDIA, BANGALORE-48. _ RBSPONDENT (BY SRI.SHARATH, ADV, FOR SRI.CHAITHANYA K.K.ADV.)| THIS ITA FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOMETAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED)16.01.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.377/BANG/2012, FOR:TH EASSHSSMBENTYRAR2004-05PRAYINGTOFORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW.STATED THERBIN AND SEI ASIDE THR COMMON|APPELLATE ORDER OF ITAT ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE,|IN ITA NO.377/BANG/2012 DATED 16.01.2013. | THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS|DAY,DilipBb.Bhosale.J.,DELIVEREDTHEROLLOWING: PC: We have heard learned counsel for the parties. OoLearnedcounselappearingfor.therespondent, at the outset, invited our attention to thejudgment of this Court inTata Elxsi Ltd., [349 ITR 98 (Kar]]and submitted that the substantial questions oflaw raised in this appeal are squarely covered by thisjudgment and they deserve to be answered in favour ofthe assessee and against the revenue in terms thereof. 3. Having confronted with this, Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel appearing for the appellants-revenue submitted that the revenue has filed Special LeavePetition IntheSupremeCourtagainsttheaforementioned judgment of this Court and the appealis pending. He, however, fairly states that this appealmay be disposed of in terms of that judgment withdirection to the Assessing Officer to pass consequentialorder only aiter SLP/Appeal is disposed of by thesupreme Court. In other words, he submitted that theAssessing Officer may be directed to pass consequentialorder in the light of the order of the Supreme Court that.will be passed in the abovementioned SLP/Appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent, has no.objection for making such observations and for disposalof this appeal. oD. In the circumstances, we dispose of this appealin terms of the judgment of this Court in)Tata EILXxsLtd.,answering all the substantial questions of law infavour of the assessee and against the revenue, with direction to the Assessing Officer to pass consequential order under Section 260-1A of the Income Tax Act,1961, only in the light of the judgment of the SupremeCourt in the aforementioned SLP/Appeal that will be passed in due course. No costs. sd/- JUDGE.JUDGE. sd/-JUDGE.Srl.