OOREDOO Q P S C V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/1593/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ooredoo Q.P.S.C, a public joint stock company, challenging the final assessment order and penalty notices issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Bengaluru, under various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2012-13. The core issue revolved around interconnect usage charges, a matter previously addressed in the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Vodafone Idea Ltd. vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax, which itself was influenced by a Supreme Court decision. The petitioner argued that the assessment and penalties were unjust, citing these precedents. The respondent, representing the Revenue, acknowledged the ongoing review of the Supreme Court's decision in the Engineering Analysis Centre case, which could potentially alter the legal landscape concerning the issues raised.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 759124 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Vodafone Idea Ltd. vs. Deputy Director of Income-Tax, (International Taxation), Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and Another
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI; M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: GEETHA K; NARENDRA J JAIN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Demand notice; Interconnect Usage Charges; Penalty notices
• Section: 147; 143(3); 271(1)(c); 274; 271(1)(b); 144C

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5222 WP No. 1593 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 1593 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN: OOREDOO Q.P.S.C, M/S OOREDOO QATAR (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. QTEL), C/O TAX COMPAAS, OFFICE AT 56/1, FIRST FLOOR, KANAKAPURA ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE -560 004, KARNATAKA. (AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR. MUKESH SHAH, S/O ROSHANLAL SHAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS) REGISTERED AS PUBLIC JOINT STOCK COMPANY. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. GEETHA RANI K, ADVOCATE AND SRI. NARENDRA KUMAR J. JAIN, ADVOCATE) AND: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-2(2), 4TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80FT ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE AND SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED BY AN APPROPRIATE WRIT Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5222 WP No. 1593 of 2025 OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF THE CERTIORARI OR OTHER WISE THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD 18.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE LEARNED RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) RWS 147RWS 144C FOR AY 2012-13 ENCLOSED IN ANNX-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT ORAL ORDER Learned counsel Sri.Dilip.M., accepts notice for the respondent. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Narendra Kumar.J., for petitioner and learned counsel Sri.Dilip.M., for respondent/Revenue. Perused the writ petition papers. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the final assessment order passed under Sections 143(3), 147 and 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘1961 Act’) for the assessment year 2012-13 as well as penalty notices issued - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5222 WP No. 1593 of 2025 under Section 274 and 271(1)(b) and (c) and demand notice. 4. Learned counsel would submit that the subject matter of the writ petition as well as the order passed relates to interconnect usage charges. It is submitted by both the learned counsel that the issues raised in the present writ petition is covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in VODAFONE IDEA LTD., VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)1. 5. Learned counsel Sri.Dilip.M., appearing for respondent would only submit that the Division Bench of this Court placed reliance on the decision of the ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER2 and it is submitted that against the decision in ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF 1 (2023) 152 taxmann.com 575 (Karnataka) 2 (2022) 3 SCC 321 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5222 WP No. 1593 of 2025 EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED (supra), Revenue has filed Review Petition. Therefore, he seeks liberty to file review, if they succeed in the Review Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court. 6. Submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties is considered carefully and on going through the pleadings and the decisions on which, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on reliance i.e., VODAFONE IDEA LTD., (supra), I am of the view that the prayer of the petitioner needs to be allowed in terms of the decision of the VODAFONE IDEA LTD., (supra). 7. Accordingly, Annexure-A bearing No. ITBA/AST/ M/147/2021-22/1037076202(1) dated 18.11.2021; Annexure-B dated 18.11.2021; Annexure-C bearing No. DIN:ITBA/PNL/S271(1)(b)/2021-22/1037076605(1) dated 19.11.2021 and Annexure-D bearing No.ITBA/PNL/S 271(1)(c)/2021-22/1037076622(1) dated 19.11.2021 are quashed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5222 WP No. 1593 of 2025 8. Liberty is reserved to the Revenue to file Review Petition based on the outcome of the Review Petition pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED (supra). 9. With the above, writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38 CT: BHK "