Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH 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.143 OF 2010
BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD
BANGALORE.
THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)
C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD
BANGALORE.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.)
AND:
DEEPAK CABLES (I) LTD., NO.313, EMBASSY CENTRE 3RD FLOOR, CRESCENT ROAD BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) - - -
THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 27-11-2009
PASSED IN ITA NO.634/BANG/2008, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.634/BANG/2008, DATED 27-11-2009, CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE.
THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue.
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 2005-06. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.11.2011 on the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Appellate Authorities were correct in not taking into consideration the material detected in the course of survey dated 09-03-2004
(during AY 2001-02) that the Tumkur unit manufacturing electrical cables had commenced 20 years earlier and it was not a new unit as per section 80IA of the Act, which was confirmed by Mr. Subramanyam, Mr. Venkateshwara Rao in the statement recorded u/s. 131 of the Act and the withdrawal of claim u/s.80IA of the Act by the assessee and consequently recorded a perverse finding? 2. Whether the assessee is entitled to claim deduction u/s.80IA of the Act, in respect of old unit situated at Tumkur, manufacturing electrical cables, which claim was not considered by taking into account the entire evidence recorded by the Assessing Officer? 3. Whether the finding recorded that the revised return having been withdrawn the assessment order cannot be sustained is correct?
When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the aforesaid
substantial questions of law which are involved in this appeal have already been answered in favour of the revenue by a Bench of this Court by order dated 03.06.2014 passed in ITA No.205/2008.
In view of the aforesaid submission and for the reasons assigned in the order dated 03.06.2014 passed in ITA No.205/2008, the substantial questions of law framed in this appeal are answered in favour of the revenue.
In the result, the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is hereby quashed and the order passed by the Assessing Authority is restored. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE