Ita/69/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Dsl Software Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF JUNE 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR I.T.A. NO.69 OF 2010 BETWEEN 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(2), CIRCLE-11(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K V ARAVIND, ADV.) AND M/S D.S.L. SOFTWARE LTD., AMALGAMATED WITH HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD., LEELA GALLERIA, 6 FLOOR, NO.23, AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE. (BY SRI A.SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI M LAVA, ADV.) - - - …RESPONDENT THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 14-09-2007 PASSED IN ITA NO.561/BANG/2006, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-2002, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.561/BANG/2006 DATED 14/09/2007 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE,IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Mr.A.Shankar, learned Senior counsel for Mr.M.Lava, learned counsel for the assessee. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue which was admitted by a Bench of this Court by an order dated 01.02.2012 on the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the order of the Commissioner u/s. 263 of the Act passed in the name of M/s. DSL Software Ltd., (now known as M/s. HCL Technologies Ltd., is without jurisdiction as the notice u/s. 263 of the Act was issued in the name of M/s. HCL Technologies Ltd? 2. Whether the Tribunal should have taken into consideration Section 170 of the Act and other provisions under the Act which contemplated that service of notice on the assessee was intimated about the proceedings and participation in the proceedings would be sufficient compliance and consequently recorded a perverse finding? The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the assessment year 2001-02. 3. When the matter came up today, learned Senior counsel for the assessee, while inviting the attention of this Court to the proposal under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, submitted that the tax impact is less than `1 Crore. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable in view of the circular dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the appeal may be disposed of with liberty to revive the same subject to the condition that if the tax effect is more than `1 Crore or exceptions as mentioned in the notification dated 08.08.2019 are attracted. 5. In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the revenue. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV