Ita/492/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Ikanos Communication

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALOREDATEKD THIS THE 1[‘T]DAY OF JUNE 2014 PRESEHBN THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICK N. KUMAR AND THERE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR INCOME TAX APPBKAL NO.492 OF 201 BETWEEN ° 1. THR COMMISSIONBR OF INCOME-TAX. C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD| BANGALORE "2. THR ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(4)_RASHTROTHANA BHAVANRASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: M/s. IKANOS COMMUNICATION(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED| FLOOR, CORPORATE MILLERNO.332/1, THIMMAIAH ROADVASANTHNAGARBANGALORE — 560 052 |—. RESPONDENT| (BY SRI.T.SURYANARAYANA, ADV. FOR M/s. KING &PARTRIDGE, ADVS.) This appeal is filed under Section 260-A of IncomeTax Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 24.5.2013 passedin ITA No.11/72/Bang/2011, tor the assessment year2008-09 praying to formulate the substantial questions oflaw stated therein and etc. This appeal coming on for Admission this day,N.KUMAR J., delivered the following: ORDER In this appeal, the substantial question of law that|arise for consideration is as under: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances”and in law the Appellate Authorities were correctin holding that the communication charges andexpenditureincurredInforeignCurrencyexcluded from export turnover in terms ofexplanation to Section 1OA of the Act has to be.reduced from total turnover, contrary to theprovisions of Section 10A of the Act?” 2. This Court, in the case of ‘TATA ELXSI LIMITED’1349 ITR 98 (KAR)| has answered the said question infavour of the assessee and against the revenue. Thelearned counsel appearing for the revenue submitted thatagainst the said judgment, a special leave petition is filedbefore the Hon’ble Supreme Court and infact it is now part heard. Therefore, he submits that if the Court is not|inclined to admit this appeal, a direction may be issued tothe Assessing Authority to proceed to pass a consequentialorder only after the judgment of the Hon’ble SupremeCourt under Section 260-1A otf the Income Tax Act. 3. We deem it appropriate to accept the saidsubmission and accordingly, we pass the following: ORDER The appeal is dismissed as the question of law raisedin this appeal is already answered in favour of theassessee. However, the consequential order to be passedby the Assessing Authority would be only after thedecision in the appeal which is now pending before theApex Court. Ordered accordingly. RV Sd/-. JUDGE Sd/-. JUDGE