IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.236/2016 BETWEEN :
INFOSYS BPO LIMITED BUILDING NO.48, 4TH FLOOR NO.26/3, 26/4 AND 26/6 ELECTRONICS CITY, HOSUR ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 100 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY MR.P.PRAKASH, PRINCIPAL CORPORATE TAXATION ...APPELLANT (BY SRI T.SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE) AND :
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1) (ERSTWHILE THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 11(4) BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT. ROAD KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 095 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 095
(BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND & SRI DILIP, ADVOCATES) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.12.2015 PASSED BY THE ITAT, “B” BENCH BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1004/BANG/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Ag.CJ (Oral):
Sri K.V.Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submits that the questions raised in this appeal are answered in favour of the appellant by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC)]. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.12.2015 (Annexure-E) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘‘B’’ Bench, Bangalore in ITA.No.1004/Bang/2014 is set aside. The appeal is accordingly allowed.
Appeal allowed.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE LB