Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013 P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D V SHYLENDRA KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B SREENIVASE GOWDA ITA No.428 of 2009
BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,
C.R. BUILDING,
QUEENS ROAD,
BANGALORE.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,
CIRCLE-11 (3),
C.R. BUILDING,
QUEENS ROAD,
BANGALORE.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.)
AND:
M/S. ENCORRE SOFTWARE LIMITED., NO.45, 6TH FLOOR, LEO COMPLEX, RESIDENCY CROSS ROAD, BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT
2 (BY SRI. A.SHANKAR & SRI. M.LAVA, ADVS.,)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 17- 04-2009 PASSED IN ITA NO.1462/BANG/2008, FOR THE ASSESSEMTN YEAR 2005-06, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 directed against the order dated 17.04.2009 passed in I.T.A. No. 1462/2008 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bangalore ‘A’ Bench, Bangalore for the assessment year 2005-06.
The Revenue has raised the following substantial question of law for examination in this appeal: Whether the Appellate Authorities were correct in holding that the amount of Rs.,28,32,607/- claimed by the assessee as a revenue expenditure towards semi finished products is an allowable deduction even though this amount was quantified on estimate basis and not actual as the assessee was following mercantile system of accounting and the same had not accrued?
3 3. Notice had been issued to the Assessee and the Assessee is represented through learned Counsel Sri A. Shankar.
Sri K.V. Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant Revenue submits that the Tribunal without deciding the appeal before it had followed the view taken by the Tribunal in respect of the very Assessee relating to assessment year 2001-02 on the very question and therefore had allowed the appeal of the Assessee and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.
It is pointed out that the order of the Tribunal relating to assessment year 2001-02 and in respect of the very Assessee and in respect of the very issue involving the very question was subject matter of the appeal before this Court questioned by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 1143/2006 and this Court in terms of order dated 8th October, 2012 set aside the order of the Tribunal and the authorities below and the
4 matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer to enable the Assessee to putforth all his contentions in a proper manner as the dispute was not examined by the Assessing Officer, in the manner as was projected later by the Assessee who had not raised such contentions before the Assessing Officer.
Following the same, this matter also has to be remitted to the Assessing Officer by setting aside the order of the Tribunal and Assessing Officer.
Sri A. Shankar, learned Counsel for the Assessee submits he has no objection for remand.
In the circumstances, the appeal is allowed. The impugned
order dated 17-04-2009 passed in ITA No.1462/Bang/2008, for the assessment year 2005-06 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment after giving proper opportunity to the Assessee. In view of the remand, question of law is not
5 answered. All contentions are kept open for both sides to establish their case. The Assessing Authority to issue fresh notice to the Assessee.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE
Vb*