Nice Ltd.,(Formerly known as Nice Systems Ltd.,), Bangalore V. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bangalore

ITA 1501/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2356 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P V PRADEEP KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: UMASHANKAR GAUTAM

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT (IT) A NO. 1501 /BANG/201 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 201 1 - 1 2 M/S. NICE LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWS AS NICE SYSTEMS LIMITED) NICE INTERACTIVE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., 3, QUADRANT, 8 TH FLOOR, TOWER 1, UMIYA BUSINESS BAY, MARATHAHALLI, SARJAPUR OUTER RING ROAD, BANGALORE 560 103. PAN: AADCN2524J VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI UMASHANKAR GAUTAM, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : DR. P.V. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADDL. CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 18 . 0 7 .2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 . 0 8 .2018 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME I S DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-12, BANGALORE DATED 14.06.2016 FOR AS SESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER. THE GROUNDS MENTIONED HEREIN TAKEN BY THE APPELLANT ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ONE ANOTHER. 1. THAT IN THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TA X OFFICER, CIRCLE- I(I), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BANGALORE (LEARNED AS SESSING OFFICER' OR 'LEARNED AO') AND LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TA X (APPEALS) 12, BANGALORE [`CIT(A)1, IS BAD IN LAW AND LIABLE T O BE SET ASIDE. 2. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED AO, IN IT(IT)A NO. 1501/BANG/2016 PAGE 2 OF 2 BRINGING TO TAX THE RECEIPTS FROM THE SALE OF SOFTW ARE OF INR 14,33,86,366 AS ROYALTY INCOME. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO AND/OR TO ALTER, AMEND, RESCIND, MODIFY THE GROUNDS HEREIN BELOW OR PRODUCE FURTHER DOCUMENTS BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 3. THE LD. AR OF ASSESSEE MADE VARIOUS ARGUMENTS BU T IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE BENCH THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS SQU ARELY COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD. AS REPORTED IN 345 ITR 494. IN REPLY, LD. AR OF ASSESSEE HAD NOTHING TO SAY BECAUSE LD. CIT(A ) HAS ALSO FOLLOWED THE SAME JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REND ERED IN THE CASE OF SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD. (SUPRA) AS NOTED ON PA GE NO. 18 OF THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITION, THE ISSUE RAISED IN ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY RESPECTFU LLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CAS E OF SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD. (SUPRA). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DA TE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 31 ST AUGUST, 2018. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.