Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
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.
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?”
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.
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