Ita/301/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. M/S Sitel Operating

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.301/2013 BRITWEBB 1.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IILCRNTRAL REVBNUB BUILDINGSCRNTRAL REVBNUB BUILDINGS QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 56000 1. 2.THR DEPUTY COMMISSIONBR OF INCOME TAX|CIRCLE 12(3),BANGALORE. CIRCLE 12(3),BANGALORE. _. APPELLANTS (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND: M/S.SITEL OPERATING CORPORATIONINDIA LTD., No.6/9, COOKE TOWN,HIGH STREET, BANGALORE-560 OO5. _ RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT Sd-UNREPRESENTED) THIS [TA FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX.ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:28/02/2013PASSED.IN-ITA|NO./786/ BANG/2012ROR|THERASSESSMENT YBAR 2007-08 PRAYING TO FORMULATETHE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN|ANT)SETASIDETHE.APPBRLLATEORDERDATHD.28.02.2013PASSEDBY|THERITAT,‘B’BENCH,|BANGALORE,IN-APPEALPROCEBEDINGSITA|NO./786/BANG/2012 AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APEPAL. THIS TTA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS|DAY,Duip B. Bhosale J.,DBLIVERED THRRFOLLOWING: PC;| We have heard Mr.Sanmathi, learned counsel forthe Revenue. None appears for the respondent, thoughserved. 2. Mr.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the Revenue, at the outset, invited our attention to the order passedtoday (28.04.2014) in ITA No.188/2012 and submittedthat this appeal may also be disposed of in terms of thatorder. 3. The order passed in ITA No.188/2012 dated°"28,.04.2014 reads thus “We have heard learned counsel tor theparties. By consent, the appeal is heard forfinal disposal at the stage of admission. 2. Learned counsel appearing for therespondent, at the outset, invited ourattention to the judgment of this Court inTata Elxsi Ltd., [349 ITR 98 (Kar)andsubmitted that the substantial questions oflaw raised in this appeal are squarelycovered by this judgment and they deserveto be answered in favour of the assessee andagainst the revenue in terms thereof. | 3.Havingcontrontedwiththis,Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel appearingfor the appellants-revenue submitted thatthe revenue has filed Special Leave Petition1ntheSupremeCourtagainstthe.aforementioned judgment of this Court andthe appeal is pending. He, however, fairlystates that this appeal may be disposed of interms of this judgment, with direction to theAssessing Officer to pass consequential orderonly after SLP/Appeal is disposed of by theSupremeCourt.Inotherwords,he. submitted that the Assessing Officer may bedirected to pass consequential order in the|light of the order of the Supreme Court that.will be passed in the abovementionedSLP/Appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent,hasT1Oobjection{Ormakingsuch.observations and for disposal of this appeal. o. In the circumstances, we dispose ofthis appeal in terms of the judgment of thisCourt 1nTata Elxsi Ltd.,answering all thesubstantial questions of law in favour of theassessee and against the revenue, withdirection to the Assessing Officer to pass.consequential order under Section 260-1A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, only in the light ofthe judgment of the Supreme Court in theaforementioned SLP/Appeal that will be)passed in due course. No costs’.| 4. Mr.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the Revenue further submits that the substantial questions of lawraised in this appeal are also squarely covered by the judgment of this Court inTata Elxsi Ltd.,and those| may be decided in favour of the assessee and againstthe revenue in terms of the order dated 28.04.2014 in/ITA No.188/2012.| o. In the circumstances, we dispose of this appealin terms of the judgment of this Court inTata EIxsi Ltd.,answering all the substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee and against the revenue, withdirection to the Assessing Officer to pass consequentialorder 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 bepassed in due course. No costs. Sd/-| JUDGE. sd/-. JUDGE. Srl.