We Nave Neard Learned Counsel For The Parties. — v. Yokogawaindia Ltd, In Ita

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 MANOHARITA.NOS.291-292/2012 | BETWEEN 1.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -IIICR BUILDING, QUEENS ROADCR BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE| 2.THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX. CIRCLE-12(2), BANGALORE... APPELLANTS (BY SRI EI SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND M/S OCWEN FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PVT LTD 4TH & 6TH FLOOR, SALARPURIA ARENA, 24HOSUR ROAD, BANGALORE-30_.. RESPONDENT | (BY SRI T SURYANARAYANA, ADV., FOR KING & PARTRIDGE) THESE ITAs FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961,|ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 19/04/2012 PASSED IN ITA.NO.502/BANG/2011 AND C.O. NO.41/B/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENTYEAR 2003-04, PRAYING T7O:1. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIALQUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, II. SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE.ORDER DATED 19/04/2012 PASSED BY THE ITAT ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS ITA.NO.502/BANG/2011 AND C.O. NO.41/B/2011, IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE AND EQUITY.| THESE ITAS COMING ON FOR’ HEARING, THIS’ DAY, | Dilip B. Bhosale J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING PC: We nave neard learned counsel for the parties. — 2.Learned counsel appearing for the respondent,at the outset, invited our attention to the judgments of this.Court inCommissioner of Income Tax v. YokogawaIndia Ltd, in ITA No.78/2011 & 918/2011 decidedon 9.8.2011 and Tata Elxsi Ltd., [349 ITR 98 (Kar) ] and submitted that the substantial questions of law raised in these appeals are squarely covered by those judgments|and they deserve to be answered in favour of the assessee|and against the revenue in terms thereof. _ 3. Having confronted with this, Mr.E.I1.Sanmathi,learned counsel appearing for the appellants-revenue| submitted that the revenue has filed Special LeavePetitions in the Supreme Court against the aforementionedjudgments of this Court and the appeals are pending. He,nowever, fairly states that these appeals may be disposed|of in terms of those judgments with direction to theAssessing Officer to pass consequential order only after)SLPs/Appeals are disposed of by the Supreme Court. In.other words, he submitted tnat the Assessing Officer may|be directed to pass consequential order in the light of the)order of the Supreme Court that will be passed in theabovementioned SLPs/Appeals. _ 4Learned counsel for the respondent nas noobjection for making such observations and for disposal oftnese appeals. 5.In the circumstances,we dispose of theseappealsin terms of the judgments of this Court inYokogawa India Ltd, andTata Elxsi Ltd.,answeringthe substantial questions of law in favour of the assesseeand 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 Supreme Court in the aforementionedSLPs/Appeals that will be passed in due course. No costs. | TL Sd/-.JUDGE| Sd/-JUDGE|