Karnataka High Court
The Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs Messers Vsl Mining Company Pvt Ltd on 10 January, 2023
Author: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
-1-
ITA No. 36 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 36 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
1. THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT(A)
5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING
80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA
BENGALURU-560 095
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 (3), PRESENT ADDRESS
DCIT, CIRCLE-2 (1) (2),
2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING,
80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA,
BENGALURU-560 095
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ARAVIND K V.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. MESSERS VSL MINING COMPANY PVT. LTD.,
by MADHURI S HOUSE OF LAD, PALACE ROAD,
Location: High SANDUR, KARNATAKA -583 119.
Court of
Karnataka
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. A SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI LAVA M.,ADVOCATE)
-2-
ITA No. 36 of 2020
THIS ITA UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961,
ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 28/06/2019
PASSED IN ITA NO. 1854/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR
2008-2009, PRAYING TO 1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL
QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. 2. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND
SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 1854/BANG/2013 DATED
28/06/2019 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 ANNEXURE-D AND
CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER
CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BENGALURU AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal by the Revenue, challenging the order dated 28.06.2019 in ITA No.1854/Bang/2013 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru has been admitted to consider following questions of law:
"1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is submitted that the tribunal erred in holding that assessee-company is entitled for deduction under section 10B of the Act without appreciating that the assessee--3- ITA No. 36 of 2020
company has not exported Article to satisfy the conditions set out in section 10B of the Act?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessing authority cannot take cognizance of the seized material in the proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act without invoking provisions of section 153C of the Act by ignoring that there is no bar section 143(3) nor under section 153C or under any other provisions of the Act to take cognizance of seized material in regular assessment?"
2. At the outset Shri.A.Shankar, learned Senior Advocate for the assessee submitted that question No.1 has been answered against Revenue in "Tata Elxsi Ltd., Vs. ACIT".1 Shri. K.V. Aravind, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue does not dispute the same. Shri.Aravind also submitted that question No.2 is the subject matter in other appeals and the same may be kept open.
1 (2015) 127 DRT 327 (Kar) -4- ITA No. 36 of 2020
3. The question No.1 is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Question No.2 is kept open.
4. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i) Appeal is allowed in part.
ii) Order dated 28.06.2019 in ITA No.1854/Bang/2013 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru is set aside so far as it relates to question No.1.
iii) Question No.2 is kept open.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE BH