Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
I.T.A. NO.621 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
C.R. BUILDING, ATTAVARA
MANGALORE-575001.
THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
CIRCLE-1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN
MALPE ROAD, AADIUDUIP
AMBALAPADI PO, UDUPI-576103. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.)
AND:
M/S. SYNDICATE BANK H.O. MANIPAL UDUPI-576104 PNA: AACCS 4699E. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) - - -
THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30-06-2015
PASSED IN ITA NO.1701/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1701/BANG/2013 DATED 30.06.2015 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, UDUPI.
THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Mr.T.Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the assessee.
This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2004-05. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.06.2016 on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the Revenue is liable to pay interest on the unpaid interest calculated under Section 244A of the I.T. Act when same is contrary to provisions of said section?”
When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submits that the substantial question of law involved in this appeal has been answered by a Bench of this Court in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by judgment dated 07.10.2020 passed in ITA No.582/2013. The aforesaid aspect of the matter could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue.
In view of the aforesaid submission and for the reasons assigned by us in the judgment dated 07.10.2020 passed in ITA No.582/2013, the substantial
question of law framed in this appeal is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE