THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S KIRLOSKAR INVESTMENTS & FINANCE LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court set aside the ITAT's order and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment. This decision was based on similar reasons as a previous case involving the same assessee for earlier assessment years.
What were the facts?
The Income Tax Department appealed an ITAT order for the assessment year 1999-2000. The appeal was filed against M/s. Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd.
What were the issues?
Whether the ITAT's order was correct and if a fresh assessment was warranted based on prior rulings for the same assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.V.PINTO ITA No.463/2007 BETWEEN: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. KIRLOSKAR INVESTMENTS & FINANCE LTD., II FLOOR, C BLOCK, UNITY BUILDING, J.C.ROAD,
2 BANGALORE. RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.S. JAYARAM, O.L.) This ITA is filed u/S.260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 30-11-2006 passed in ITA No. 12/Bang/2005 for the Assessment Year 1999-00, praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: (i) formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein and (ii) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT, Bangalore in ITA No.12/Bang/2005 dated 30-11-2006 & confirm the order of the Appellate Commissioner confirming the order passed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(2), Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity. This appeal is coming on for final hearing this day, SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following: JUDGMENT Registry is directed to show the name of Sri K.S.Jayaram–Official liquidator for the respondent. 2. This court in I.T.A.No.3046/2005 has set aside the order in respect of the assessee in question for earlier assessment years and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. For the similar reasons explained in I.T.A.No.3046/2005 this appeal is also partly allowed. The order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment.
3 Sri K.S. Jayaram, the official Liquidator is permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE psg*
More judgments on Section 260-A
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026