COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ICDS LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/341/2012HC KarnatakaKAHC01043673201218 August 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial questions of law were already decided against the revenue by a previous bench of the same court. Therefore, the appeal was decided in favor of the assessee.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order concerning the assessment year 1989-90. The appeal raised questions about the inclusion of capital profits on land sale in book profits under Section 115J and the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction to tax unincluded book profits.

What were the issues?

Whether capital profits on sale of land credited to capital reserves are includible in book profits under Section 115J. Whether the AO has jurisdiction to tax book profits not included in audited accounts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115J,Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

I.T.A. NO.341 OF 2012

BETWEEN:

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS ATTAVAR, MANGALURU-575001. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.)

AND:

M/S. ICDS LTD., SYNDICATE HOUSE P.B.NO.46, UPENDRA NAGAR MANIPAL-576119. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S. PARTHASARATHI, ADV.) - - -

THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 04-07-2012 PASSED IN ITA NO.1278/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1989-90, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN.

II. SET ASIDE THE COMMON APPELLATE ORDER DATED 04-07-2012 PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE, AS SOUGHT FOR IN ITA NO.1278/BANG/2011, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the appellant entered appearance through video conferencing. Mr.S.Parthasarathi, learned counsel for the respondent entered appearance through video conferencing.

2.

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 which was admitted by a Bench of this Court on 15.01.2013 to consider the following substantial questions of law: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law by holding that the capital profits on sale of land, which are credited to the capital reserves account in the balance

sheet, are not to be included under the book profits for the purpose of Section 115J?” 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law by holding that the Assessing Officer has no power and jurisdiction to bring to tax the income which is includible under the book profit but not included under the book profit in the audited statement of accounts?”

3.

When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the revenue fairly submitted that the substantial questions of law which arise for consideration in this appeal have already been answered against the revenue by a Bench of this Court in ‘SRI HARIRAM HOTELS (P) LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX AND ANOTHER’ in ITA No.53/2009 decided on 16.12.2015.

4.

In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law, the substantial questions of law framed by this Court in this

appeal are also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 115J

All 67 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115J →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →