The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru / The Income-tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Bengaluru v. Aptuit Informatics India Pvt. Ltd. (Now Merged With Laurus Labs Pvt. Ltd.)
[Citation -2020-LL-0625-8]

Citation 2020-LL-0625-8
Appellant Name The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru / The Income-tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Bengaluru
Respondent Name Aptuit Informatics India Pvt. Ltd. (Now Merged With Laurus Labs Pvt. Ltd.)
Court HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 25/06/2020
Assessment Year 2008-09
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags export promotion industrial park • benefit of deduction • sister concern • amalgamation • stpi unit • merger
Bot Summary: 3 Sri Nageshwar Rao, learned counsel for respondent assessee through video conference. Whether the Tribunal on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law was correct in holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s 10A even though there is no continuation of business by the assessee as the STPI unit was taken over by way of acquiring the STPI license from its sister concern and not 4 by way of amalgamation or merger as per section 10A 2. Whether the Tribunal on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law was correct in holding that the assessee company has not violated the conditions stated in Section 10A(2)(ii) and 10A(7A) and it was only an organizational change without a change in the place, form or business of the unit 3. Similar substantial questions of law were framed in I.T.A.No. 293/2012, wherein, this Court by order passed today, has answered the aforementioned substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, in view of the judgments dated 14.11.2018 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in I.T.A.No. For the reasons assigned in the aforesaid judgments, the substantial questions of law are 5 answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. It is clarified that the benefit of deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, shall enure to the assessee for the unexpired period.


1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.22 OF 2014 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1), RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: M/S APTUIT INFORMATICS INDIA PVT. LTD., (NOW MERGED WITH LAURUS LABS PVT. LTD.,) PLOT NO. 100/101, 2 EXPORT PROMOTION INDUSTRIAL PARK WHITEFILED, BENGALURU 560 066. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI NAGESWAR RAO AND SRI ARUN SRI KUMAR, ADVS.) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED: 08.08.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.219/BANG/2013, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 PRAYING TO: i. FORMULATE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. ii. ALLOW APPEAL AND SET ASIDE ORDER PASSED BY ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.219/BANG/2013 DATED 08.08.2013 AND CONFIRM ORDER OF APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING ORDER PASSED BY INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 11(1), BENGALURU. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., MADE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Sri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for appellants Revenue. 3 Sri Nageshwar Rao, learned counsel for respondent assessee through video conference. This appeal is filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961, by Revenue, being aggrieved by order dated 08.08.2013 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, in ITA.No.219/Bang/2013. 2. appeal was admitted vide order dated 04.07.2014, for considering following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether Tribunal on facts and in circumstances of case and in Law was correct in holding that assessee is entitled to benefit of deduction u/s 10A even though there is no continuation of business by assessee as STPI unit was taken over by way of acquiring STPI license from its sister concern and not 4 by way of amalgamation or merger as per section 10A (7A)? 2. Whether Tribunal on facts and in circumstances of case and in Law was correct in holding that assessee company has not violated conditions stated in Section 10A(2)(ii) and 10A(7A) and it was only organizational change without change in place, form or business of unit? 3. Similar substantial questions of law were framed in I.T.A.No.293/2012, wherein, this Court by order passed today, has answered aforementioned substantial questions of law in favour of assessee and against Revenue, in view of judgments dated 14.11.2018 passed by Division Bench of this Court in I.T.A.No.4/2011 and I.T.A.No.368/2010. 4. For reasons assigned in aforesaid judgments, substantial questions of law are 5 answered in favour of assessee and against Revenue. However, it is clarified that benefit of deduction under Section 10A of Income Tax Act, 1961, shall enure to assessee for unexpired period. 5. Accordingly, appeal is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE nvj Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru / Income-tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Bengaluru v. Aptuit Informatics India Pvt. Ltd. (Now Merged With Laurus Labs Pvt. Ltd.)
Report Error