COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -III V. M/S SITEL OPERATING

ITA/357/2012

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax-III and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax against M/s. Sitel Operating Corporation India Ltd. concerning the assessment year 2006-07. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the appellate order dated 14.05.2012 passed by the ITAT, 'B' Bench, Bangalore. The primary legal contention revolved around substantial questions of law which were reportedly covered by a previous judgment of the Karnataka High Court in Tata Elxsi Ltd. The Revenue's counsel suggested that the current appeal could be resolved in accordance with the Tata Elxsi judgment, pending the outcome of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed in the Supreme Court.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 729044 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-04-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Tata Elxsi Ltd., [349 ITR 98 (Kar)]
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: C P AYAPPA
• Assessee Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2006-07; Income Tax; Substantial questions of law; ITA No.501/BANG/2011
• Section: 260-A; 260(1A)

Judgement Text

" - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF APRIL 2014 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR I.T.A.NO.357/2012 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III C.R. BUILDINGS QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 560001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 12(3) BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND: M/s.SITEL OPERATING CORPORATION INDIA LTD. NO.18, BANASWADI MAIN ROAD, PULAKESHINAGAR, P.O., BANGALORE-560 065. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.C.P.AYAPPA, ADV. FOR TRILEGAL ADVS. – Absent) - 2 - THIS ITA FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:14/05/2012 PASSED IN ITA NO.501/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 14.05.2012 PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APEPAL PROCEEDINGS ITA NO.501/BANG/2011 DATED 14.05.2012, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, Dilip B. Bhosale J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PC: We have heard Mr.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the Revenue. None appears for the respondent, though served. 2. Mr.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the Revenue, at the outset, invited our attention to the order passed today (28.04.2014) in ITA No.188/2012 and submitted that this appeal may also be disposed of in terms of that order. 3. The order passed in ITA No.188/2012 dated 28.04.2014 reads thus:- - 3 - “We have heard learned counsel for the parties. By consent, the appeal is heard for final disposal at the stage of admission. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent, at the outset, invited our attention to the judgment of this Court in Tata Elxsi Ltd., [349 ITR 98 (Kar)] and submitted that the substantial questions of law raised in this appeal are squarely covered by this judgment 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.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel appearing for the appellants-revenue submitted that the revenue has filed Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court against the aforementioned judgment of this Court and the appeal is pending. He, however, fairly states that this appeal may be disposed of in terms of this judgment, with direction to the Assessing Officer to pass consequential order only after SLP/Appeal is disposed of by the Supreme Court. In other words, he - 4 - submitted that 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 the abovementioned 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 of this appeal in terms of the judgment of this Court in Tata Elxsi Ltd., answering all the substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee and 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 aforementioned 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 law raised in this appeal are also squarely covered by the - 5 - judgment of this Court in Tata Elxsi Ltd., and those may be decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in terms of the order dated 28.04.2014 in ITA No.188/2012. 5. In the circumstances, we dispose of this appeal in terms of the judgment of this Court in Tata Elxsi Ltd., answering all the substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee and 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 aforementioned SLP/Appeal that will be passed in due course. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Srl. "