COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KRS ENTERPRISES PVT LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found that the Tribunal's judgment was based on undisputed facts and was legally sound. Therefore, no interference was warranted.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the ITAT's order which held that income from a building was business income. The High Court had previously dealt with a similar issue in another case.
What were the issues?
Whether the income derived from a building constitutes income from business. The appeal questioned the legal validity of the Tribunal's finding on this matter.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2015
Present
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINEET SARAN
THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE S SUJATHA
Income Tax Appeal 380 / 2014 Between 1 Commissioner of Income Tax
C R Building, Queens Road
Bangalore
2 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle 11 (5)
Rashtrothana Bhavan
Nrupathunga Road
Bangalore
Appellants
(By Sri K V Aravind, Sr. SC),
And
M/s KRS Enterprises Pvt Ltd # 337/A, 18th Cross Upper Palace Orchards Sadashiva Nagar Bangalore 80
Respondent
Appeal is filed under S.260A of the Income Tax Act praying to set aside the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in ITA 966/Bang/2013 on 4.4.2014 confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 11(5), Bangalore.
Appeal coming on for Admission this day, Vineet Saran J, delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
The appeal is preferred by the Revenue challenging the order of the Tribunal holding that the income from building is income from business. The said question was considered by this Court at length in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s Velankani Information Systems (P) Ltd in ITA 273 – 276/2012 decided on 2.4.2013
The judgment rendered by the Tribunal is based on facts which are not disputed and therefore, the finding is legal and does not call for any interference.
No substantial question of law is involved in this appeal for consideration. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- Judge
sd/-
Judge An
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026