No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI
ITA No.139/2016
BETWEEN:
The Commissioner of Income-tax, LTU JSS Tower’s BSK III Stage, Bangalore 560 085
The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU JSS Tower’s BSK III Stage, Bangalore 560 085 ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE )
AND: M/s Vijaya Bank, Ho: Central Accounts Dept. 41/2, M.G.Road, Bangalore,- 560 001 PAN: AAACV 4791J …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. T SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE)
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED
2 11.9.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.760/BANG/2011,FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri. K.V. Aravind , learned counsel for the revenue.
Sri T Suryanarayana, learned Counsel for the respondent.
This appeal, under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) has been filed by the revenue which was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.02.2018 on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, ITAT was right in allowing the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the provisions of on the ground that the provisions of minimum alternate tax under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are not applicable to the assessee-Bank because the assessee was not required to prepare its profit and loss accounts in
3 accordance with the provisions of Part-II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956?”
It is a common ground that the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered by us vide judgment dated 16.01.2020 passed in ITA No.18/2014. x 3. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of by answering the substantial question framed in this appeal in terms of the judgment dated 16.1.2020 passed in ITA No.18/2014.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE Psg*