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

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND 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.333 OF 2016 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

LTU, JSS TOWERS

BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE-560085. 2. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

LTU, JSS TOWERS

BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE-560085. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. CANARA BANK 112, J.C. ROAD BANGALORE PAN: AAACC 6106G. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) - - - THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11.12.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.766/BANG/2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97, PRAYING TO: (I) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE.

2 (II) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.766/BANG/2011 DATED 11-12-2015 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE & ETC. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A 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 1996-97. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 10.10.2017 on the following substantial question of law:

Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that denial of opportunity of cross- examination results in violation of natural justice, despite efforts made by the assessing officer to trace the assessee? The object of cross examination is to test the veracity of version given in examination-in-chief? In the instance case, when it is proved with fair market amount certainty that leased equipments did not exit, whether allowing

3 cross-examination would have made any difference?