Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2016
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA ITA No.410/2015 BETWEEN:
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE-560 001
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(5) BANGALORE.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, STANDING COUNSEL)
AND:
M/S.K.MOHAN & COMPANY (EXPORTS) PVT. LTD. BANGALORE- 560 068
... RESPONDENT
ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 24/04/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.1103/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO: (A) DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT. (B) SET ASIDE THE COMMON APPELLATE
2 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2015 PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'A' BENCH, BENGALURU, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. ITA NO. 1103/BANG/2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, AS SOUGHT IN THIS APPEAL.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
The appellants-revenue have preferred this present appeal by formulating the following substantial question of law: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in relying on the decision of this Hon’ble Court in the case of CIT v/s. M/s. Yokogawa Ltd. holding that the deduction under Section 10B should be allowed in respect of profits derived from EOU-II unit without setting off of business loss of EOU-I, while this decision runs contrary to the provisions of section 70, 32(2) and 72 of the I.T Act, and the orders of this Hon’ble High Court on this issue have not reached finality as the Revenue has preferred SLP before Apex Court which are pending for adjudication”?
We have heard Sri K.V.Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants-revenue herein.
3 3. As such, in view of the decision of this Court in CIT vs. M/s.Yokogowa Ltd. reported in 341 ITR 385, the matter is covered and hence, it cannot be said that any substantial question of law would arise for consideration.
However, learned Counsel for the appellants-revenue contended that the matter is carried before the Apex Court and the question may not be concluded. Whereas, in our view, when the question is already covered by the decision of this Court, no further observation deserves to be made, except in any event, the Apex Court takes any different view, then the revenue may take appropriate proceeding in accordance with law.
Subject to the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE KSR