Bombay High Court
Principle Commissioner Of Income ... vs Syntel Limited on 24 October, 2018
Author: B.P. Colabawalla
Bench: S.C. Dharmadhikari, B.P. Colabawalla
(1)ITXA615.16 & Ors..doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 615 OF 2016
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 620 OF 2016
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 629 OF 2016
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-11 ... Appellants
Vs
Syntel Limited ... Respondents
Mr. Arvind Pinto for the Appellants in all appeals.
Mr. Srihari Iyer for the Respondents in all appeals.
CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI &
B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.
WEDNESDAY, 24TH OCTOBER, 2018 P.C. :
1 Having heard both sides, we find that these appeals do raise substantial questions of law. The assessee's counsel, however, would submit that in the case of this very assessee, the questions proposed by the Revenue have not been entertained.
He relies upon an order dated 15 th December, 2009, in three Income Tax Appeals being Income Tax Appeal Nos.1974/2009, SRP 1/4 ::: Uploaded on - 26/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/10/2018 02:01:15 ::: (1)ITXA615.16 & Ors..doc 1976 of 2009 and 1978/2009. That order was passed on the Revenue's appeal. In that, we find that the only question proposed is common and identical to Question No.5.1 at page 5 of the present appeal paper-book. That has not been entertained by this Court and the appeal has been dismissed. To this extent, the assessee's advocate is right. We, therefore, do not entertain Question No.5.1 in the Memo of this Appeal. 2 However, the following two Questions on that page also need not be entertained is the submission. The two Questions read thus :
"(1) Whether in law and on the facts of the instant case, was the Tribunal right in holding that bank interest is eligible to be treated as profits of the undertaking for the purposes of Section 10A & 10B;
when the source of this income is the placement of disposable funds with a financial institution ? (2) Whether in law, and on the facts of the instant case was the Tribunal correct in holding that the SRP 2/4 ::: Uploaded on - 26/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/10/2018 02:01:15 ::: (1)ITXA615.16 & Ors..doc interest income of the Respondent company had a direct nexus with the business and development of export of software to be eligible to be includible in the computation of profits for the purposes of deductions u/s 10A & 10B of the Act ?"
3 In relation to that we have, with the assistance of Mr. Srihari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, perused the relevant part and paragraph of the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal may have relied upon its order for prior assessment years in relation to this very assessee and Mr. Pinto does not dispute that the Revenue did bring in an Appeal pertaining to these prior Assessment Years, but the Appeals have not been disposed of or decided on merits. They were not entertained, but dismissed on the ground that they are barred by limitation. Mr. Srihari would submit that whatever may be the circumstances, the Tribunal's findings on facts have attained finality. 4 On the attention of Mr. Srihari being invited to the statement of facts and narrated by the present respondent- assessee in the Memo of Appeal presented before the First SRP 3/4 ::: Uploaded on - 26/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/10/2018 02:01:15 ::: (1)ITXA615.16 & Ors..doc Appellate Authority, we do think that these questions are substantial questions of law. We are, therefore, proceeding to admit this appeal on the above reproduced substantial Questions of law.
5 The Registrar (Judicial)/Registrar, High Court, Original Side, Bombay to ensure that the original record in relation to this Appeal is summoned from the Tribunal and offered for inspection of the parties. This paper-book is treated sufficient for the purpose of admission of this Appeal. However, the Registry must further ensure preparation of complete paper book in accordance with the Rules. The Registry, in the first instance, must send intimation of admission of this Appeal enclosing therewith a copy of this order so as to enable the Tribunal to act accordingly.
6 Mr. Srihari waives service on behalf of the respondents.
B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. SRP 4/4 ::: Uploaded on - 26/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/10/2018 02:01:15 :::