COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. MANGALORE CO OPERATIVE

PDF · subscribers
ITA/146/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01025638201529 September 2015Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arose for determination as the matter was covered by a previous judgment. However, it allowed for consequential orders if the Supreme Court reverses the precedent.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the ITAT's order allowing deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) to the assessee society. The High Court noted that a similar issue was decided in favor of the assessee in a previous case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee society is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The court considered if a substantial question of law arose based on prior judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015 PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR

I.T.A.NO.146 OF 2015 BETWEEN:

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MANGALORE

... APPELLANT

(BY:SRI.E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE ) AND:

MANGALORE CO OPERATIVE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD., I FLOOR, CLASSIC ARCADE K.S.RAO ROAD MANGALORE-575003.

... RESPONDENT

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:26/09/2014 PASSED IN ITA NO.1856/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 PRAYING TO: 1. 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 AND (2) TO SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED: 26/09/2014 PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'C' BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. ITA NO. 1856/BANG/2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10.

THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, VINEET SARAN. J DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2 JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed raising the following substantial question of law:- “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee – society is entitled to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act?”

2.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the question involved in this appeal is covered by the decision of this Court rendered in I.T.A.189/2014, Commissioner of Income Tax – III Vs. M/s.Quest Informatics Pvt. Ltd., decided on 5.1.2015 wherein, the question has been answered in favour of assessee and against the revenue.

3.

In such view of the matter, we are of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises for determination by this Court.

3 4. Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the appellant states that challenging the said order in the case of M/s.Quest Informatics Pvt. Ltd., (supra), revenue has filed an appeal before the Apex Court, which is pending.

5.

As such, in the event, Apex Court reverses the judgment, then the Assessing Authority shall pass consequential orders in terms of Section 260(1A) of the Income Tax Act and inconformity with the outcome of the appeal before Supreme Court.

With the aforesaid observations, this appeal stands dismissed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE VGR

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →