THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. SYNDICATE BANK

PDF · subscribers
ITA/583/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01047922201322 January 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial question of law regarding the negative book profit for Section 115J was already decided in a previous judgment. The current appeal was disposed of in terms of that prior ruling.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order concerning the assessment year 1990-1991. The core issue was whether the book profit for the purpose of Section 115J should be a negative figure.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law by holding that the book profit for Section 115J computation was a negative figure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115J,Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

ITA No.583/2013

BETWEEN:

1.

The Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore- 575 001.

2.

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 1, Udupi-576 001.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. E.I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE )

AND:

M/s Syndicate Bank, H.O. Manipal-576 104, …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. T SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.06.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.377/BANG/2010,FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1990-1991.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Sri. E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the revenue.

Sri. T Suryanarayana, learned Counsel for the respondent.

This appeal, under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) has been filed by the revenue which was admitted by this Court today on the following substantial question of law:

“Whether the Tribunal has committed an error in law in holding that the Book Profit to be adopted for the purpose of Sec. 115J was a negative figure of Rs.3.38 crore?”

2.

Admittedly, the aforesaid substantial question of law has been answered by us vide judgment dated 16.1.2020 passed in ITA No.18/2014.

3 Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered in terms of the judgment dated 16.01.2020 passed in ITA No.18/2014.

The appeal is disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE Psg*

More judgments on Section 115J

All 67 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115J →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →