Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs M/S. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd.,
2021 Latest Caselaw 1490 Kant

                              1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                         PRESENT

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

                            AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY

                 I.T.A. NO.1091 OF 2017
BETWEEN:

1.     PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (LTU)
       J.S.S. TOWERS, 100 FT. RING ROAD
       BANASHANKARI III STAGE
       BANGALORE-560085.

2.     COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
       CIRCLR-4(1)(1), BANGALORE
       BMTC COMPLEX, KORMANGALA
       BANGALORE.
                                              .... APPELLANTS
(BY MR. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADV.,)

AND:

M/S. IBM INDIA PVT. LTD.,
NO.12, SUBRAMANYA ARCADE
BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE-560093
PAN: AAACI 44032.
                                              ... RESPONDENT
(BY MR. PERCY PARDIWALLA, SR. COUNSEL FOR
    MS. MANASA, ADV.,)
                           ---

      THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX
ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 06.01.2017 PASSED
IN ITA NO.1028/BANG/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-
08, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, PRAYING TO:
                               2



     (i) FORMULATE THE QUESTIONS OF LAW FRAMED ABOVE
AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY DECIDING THE SUBSTANTIAL
QUESTIONS OF LAW IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANTS.
     (ii) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.01.2017,
VIDE ANNEXURE-A, PASSED BY THE ITAT 'C' BENCH, BANGALORE
FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08.
     (iii) GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS THIS HON'BLE COURT
DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUIYT.

     THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING,           THIS     DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

Mr.Jeevan J.Neeralgi, learned counsel for the revenue.

Mr.Percy Pardiwalla, learned Senior counsel along with

Smt.Manasa Ananthan, learned counsel for the assessee.

Learned Senior counsel for the assessee, on

08.01.2021, had pointed out that the Assessing Officer had

failed to implement the order passed by the Commissioner of

Income Tax, under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961

(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), within the

prescribed time limit that is 31.03.2015. Therefore, the

question involved in this appeal has been rendered academic.

2. When the matter was taken up today, learned

counsel for the revenue stated that the Assessing Officer has

not passed any order giving effect to the order passed by the

Commissioner of Income Tax within the prescribed time limit.

However, it is further submitted that merely because the

Assessing Officer has not given effect to the order passed by

the Commissioner of Income Tax, same would not debar this

Court from examining the issue involved in this appeal.

3. However, in our opinion, since the Assessing Officer

has failed to pass the order giving effect to the order passed

by the Commissioner of Income Tax, the questions of law

involved in this appeal have been rendered academic.

Therefore, it is not necessary for us to answer the same.

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

RV