THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE RAMDURG TALUKA PRIMARY TEACHERS COOPERATIVE

: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.BILLAPPA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR I.T.A.No.100003/2016 BETWEEN: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BELAGAVI. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIPPANI. … APPELLANTS (BY SHRI.Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV.) AND: THE RAMDURG TALUKA PRIMARY T EACHERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., RAMDURG, DIST:BELAGAVI. PAN:AACFR 9222 R. … RESPONDENT (BY SHRI.H.R.KAMBIYAVAR, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI, IN ITA NO.150/PNJ/2015, DTD:04.08.2015 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1, NIPPANI. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

: 2 : JUDGMENT Sri H.R. Kambiyavar, learned Counsel accepts notice for the respondent. 2. Both the learned counsel for the appellants/Revenue and the learned counsel for the respondent submit that these matters are covered by the decision of this Court in I.T.A.No.100080/2014 (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri Mahalaxmi Urban Co-operate Credit Society Ltd.) disposed of on 21.09.2015 and pray that this appeal may also be disposed of on the same terms. 3. Learned counsel for the Revenue further submits that the issue involved in this appeal has been taken up in a Special Leave Petition and the same is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Apex Court. On this premise, he prays for liberty to revive this appeal in the event of the Revenue succeeding in the appeal/s filed before the Apex Court. 4. After hearing both parties, we have held that this appeal lacks merit and deserves to be rejected by

: 3 : following the decision of this Court in ITA 100080/2014. Therefore, in the event, Revenue succeeds in the SLPs filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the parties herein shall be bound by the decision of the Apex Court. Hence, the request for liberty is misconceived and deserves to be rejected. 5. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that the parties herein shall be bound by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the SLPs said to have been filed by the Revenue on the similar issue. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Jm/-