Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH 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.170/2014 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income-Tax,
C.R.Building, Queens Road,
Bangalore.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax,
Circle-11(5),
Rashtrothana Bhavan,
Nrupathunga Road,
Bangalore.
… APPELLANTS
(By Sri K.V.Aravind, Adv.)
AND:
M/s. KBD Sugars & Distilleries Ltd., (Formerly Karnataka Breweries & Distilleries Pvt. Ltd.), No.17, Sankey Road, Bangalore.
… RESPONDENT
(By Sri V.Chandrashekar, Adv.)
This ITA is filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act praying to set aside the order passed by the ITAT,
Bangalore, in ITA No.1363/Bang/2011 dated 22.11.2013 and confirm the order of the Appellate Commissioner confirming the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(5), Bangalore.
This appeal coming on for Final Hearing, this day, S.Sujatha J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is admitted to consider the following substantial question of law. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessing officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were not justified in resorting to the proportionate disallowance of interest of Rs.10,97,85,319/- on the ground that the loans were availed for specific purposes without appreciating that the assessee had availed working capital loans and that the interest free advances made out by the assessee would have flown out of usually flow out of working capital loans?"
Learned Counsel for the respondent-assessee would submit that the issue involved herein is squarely covered by the decision of the cognate bench of this Court in the
case of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s. Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No.67/2015 disposed of on 26.10.2016.
Learned Counsel for the revenue could not dispute the same.
We have perused the judgment passed in ITA No.67/2015, wherein the cognate bench of this Court placing reliance on the decision of the Mumbai High Court in the case of RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD. - 313 ITR 340 as well as the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of RAGHUVIR SYNTHETICS LTD. - 354 ITR 222, has held that the said issue having been covered by the aforesaid decisions, no substantial question of law arises for consideration. It is pertinent to note that the decision in Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in C.A.Nos.10 to 13 of 2019.
Hence, we are of the considered view that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal.
Resultantly, the appeal stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE