PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.163 OF 2020 BETWEEN: 1. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER ON INCOME-TAX

(EXEMPTIONS), UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE

MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU-560027. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

(EXEMPTIONS), UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE

MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU-560027. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANMATHI E.I. ADV.) AND: M/S. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.49, 4TH & 5TH FLOOR KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560001 PAN: AAATK 1305J. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHARATH, ADV., FOR SRI. K.K. CHYTHANYA, ADV.,) - - -

2 THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 17-06-2019 PASSED IN ITA NO.255/BANG/2019, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, PRAYING TO: I. DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT. II. SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 17-06-2019 PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS ITA NO.255/BANG/2019 (ANNEXURE A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL, AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT 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 2014-15. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the revenue at length. From perusal of paragraph 6 of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, it is evident that the Tribunal has relied upon the order passed in the previous Assessment Years i.e. 2009-10

3 and 2010-11. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders passed by the Tribunal, the revenue had filed an appeal namely ITA No.205/2016, which has been dismissed by this Court by an order dated 13.09.2020. 3. For the aforementioned reasons, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV