THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S ATRIA POWER CORPORATION LTD

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY I.T.A.No.347/2018 BETWEEN: 1. The Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax, CIT (A), 5th Floor, BMTC Building, 80 Feet Road, Koramangala, Bengaluru - 560 095. 2. The Income-Tax Officer,

Ward-1(1)(2),

2nd Floor, BMTC Building,

80 Feet Road, Koramangala,

Bengaluru - 560 095.

… APPELLANTS (By Sri Aravind.K.V., Adv.) AND: M/s. Atria Power Corporation Ltd., # 1, Palace Road, Bengaluru - 560 001. PAN: AABCA1880E

… RESPONDENT (By Sri A.Shankar, Senior Counsel a/w Sri Bhairav Kuttaiah, Adv. & Sri S.Annamalai, Adv.)

2 This ITA is filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act praying to set aside the orders passed by the ITAT, Bengaluru, in ITA No.432/Bang/2015 dated 28.11.2017 and confirm the order of the Appellate Commissioner confirming the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(2), Bengaluru. This appeal coming on for Final Hearing, this day, S.Sujatha J., delivered the following: JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), challenging the order dated 28.11.2017 passed in ITA No.432/Bang/2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal'), relating to the assessment year 2010-11. 2. This appeal has been admitted to consider the following substantial questions of law. (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing the appeal preferred by the assessee by setting aside the CIT's order of revision passed under Section 263 of the Act?

3 (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that Section 14A disallowance amount cannot be added to assessee's income for the purpose of computation of income under Section 115JB of the Act by relying upon the decision of Special Bench in the case of Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. [2017 DEL (SB) 154 DTR PAGE 241] and also holding that issue of debatable and as such the CIT ought not to have taken up for revision under Section 263 of the Act? 3. Learned Senior Counsel Sri A.Shankar appearing for the respondent submits that the issue, in as much as Section 115JB of the Act whether applicable with respect to the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, is already covered on merits and as such examining the question whether CIT (Appeals) had jurisdiction to invoke Section 263 of the Act would render academic. 4. Learned Counsel for the revenue does not dispute the same. 5. The aforesaid submissions are placed on record.

4 6. In view of the aforesaid, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the order passed in the assessee's own case in I.T.A.No.399/2018 dated 27.07.2021. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE KK