Ita/63/2012 Of The Director Of Income-Tax v. M/S Samsung Electronics Co Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF APRIL 2014. PRESENT THE HON‘'BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE AND| THE HON‘'BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR ITA.NO.63/2012 BETWEEN 1.THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-T AX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE| 2.THE DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAXCIRCLE-II(I), INTERNATIONAL TAXATIONCIRCLE-II(I), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI K V ARAVIND, ADV.,)| AND M/S SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTDINDIA SOFTWARE OPERATIONSBAGMANE LAKE VIEW, BAGMANE TECHPARKCV RAMANAGAR, BYRASANDRABANGALORE | ... RESPONDENT | (RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS ITA FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961, ARISINGOUTOFORDER|DATED04/11/2011|PASSEDINITA!NO.142/BANG/2011,|FOR|THE.ASSESSMENT|YEAR2006-2007,PRAYING TO:I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, IJ. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE.ORDERSPASSEDBY|THE.ITAT,.BANGALOREINTTA!NO.142/BANG/2011 DATED 04/11/2011 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF.THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED.BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (INTL. TAXN.,), CIRCLE-II(1), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS ~ DAY,Dilip B. Bnosale J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING PC: We nave heard K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the| Revenue. None appears for the respondent, thoughserved. 2. Mr.Aravind, learned counsel for the Revenue, at|the outset, invited our attention to the order passed on)28.04.2014 in ITA No.188/2012 and submitted that this.appeal may also be disposed of in terms of that order. 3. Tne order passed in ITA No.188/2012 dated 28.04.7014 reads tnus:- “We nave neard learned counsel for tne parties. By consent, the appeal is heard forfinal disposal at the stage of admission. 2. Learned counsel appearing for therespondent, at tne outset, invited our attentionto the judgment of this Court inTata FEIxs|Ltd., [349 ITR 98 (Kar)]and submitted tnat.tne substantial questions of law raised in thisappeal are squarely covered py this judgmentand they deserve to be answered in favour oftne assessee and against the revenue in termsthereof. | cmHavingconfrontedwitnthis,Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel appearing for.the appellants-revenue submitted tnat tnerevenue nas filed Special Leave Petition in theSupreme Court against the aforementionedjudgment of this Court and the appeal ispending. He, however, fairly states that thisappeal may be disposed of in terms of thisjuaqgment, witn direction to the AssessingOfficer to pass consequential order only afterSLP/Appeal is disposed of by the SupremeCourt. In other words, he submitted that the|Assessing Officer may be directed to passconsequential order in the light of the order ofthe Supreme Court that will be passed in theabovementioned SLP/Appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent,has no objection for making such observations.and for disposal of this appeal. 5. In the circumstances, we dispose ofthis appeal in terms of the judgment of thisCourt InTata Elxsi Ltd.,answering all the|substantial questions of law in favour of theaSSeSSECCand.againstthe.FeEeVvenuwitndirection to the Assessing Officer to passconsequential order under Section 260-1A oftne Income Tax Act, 1961, only in the light ofthe judgment of the Supreme Court in theaforementioned SLP/Appeal that will be passedin due course. Noocosts. 4. Mr.Aravind, learned counsel for the Revenue|further submits that the substantial question of law raised.in this appeal are also squarely covered by the judgment.of tnis Court in.Tata Elxsi Ltd.,and that may be decidedin favour of the assessee and against the revenue in termsof the order dated 28.04.2014 in ITA No.188/2012. 5. In the circumstances,we dispose of_ this 4. Mr.Aravind, learned counsel for the Revenue|further submits that the substantial question of law raised.in this appeal are also squarely covered by the judgment.of tnis Court in.Tata Elxsi Ltd.,and that may be decidedin favour of the assessee and against the revenue in termsof the order dated 28.04.2014 in ITA No.188/2012. 5. In the circumstances,we dispose of_ this appealin terms of the judgment of this Court in/TataEixsi Ltd.,answering the substantial question of law infavour of the assessee and against the revenue, withdirection to the Assessing Officer to pass consequential|order under Section 260-1A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,Only in the lignt of the judgment of the Supreme Court in)the aforementioned SLP/Appeal that will be passed in duecourse. No costs. TL| Sd/-JUDGE| Sd/-JUDGE