Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Karnataka State Judicial Dept ... on 10 March, 2010

Bench: K.L.Manjunath, B.V.Nagarathna

.. AND:

° EMPLOYEES HOUSE BUILDING

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATISLd TRIS THE [O08 DAY OF MARCIL. 2010. = .
PRESENT

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE BYINAGARATIINA |

ITA.NO. 1260/2006
BETWEEN:

I THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMIES hAX
CR BUILDING.
QUEENS ROAD --

BANGALORE, 7. |

2 THE INCOME. FAX OFFICER
WARD 16(3))0 > was
CR BUILDING
QUEENS ROAD.
BANGALORE.

J. APPELLANTS

(By Sri: M V-SESHACHALA, ADV.)

"M/ Ss KARNATAKA STATE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
~ BANGALORE. |
.. RESPONDENT

(By Sri: M/S SHIVAPPA AND ASSTS,} va f &y ITA Hlech u/S.260-A of f/hAet. toe] arising out at Order datect 17-03-2006 passed in TPA No. G30/B: wig/ 2 i for the Assessinent Year 2OOT-D2. pr: avilie tliat this ion bie Court may be pfeasect to: °

- formulate the substantial questions of Livy stitted therein. ; allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by. the HAT Bangalore tn (PA No. 6! 20 /Banig/ 2004 dated 17-03:

2006 & confirm the order of "thi Appecilate. Coninissicter confirming the order passed by the Asst. C OMS: aner of Income Tax. Cirele-11(8), Banwalore, 4 i te interest of justice and equity. . 7 This ITA) conting on" lor LR ARING ou this day. MANJUNATH J. delivered he iollowiu: J "JUDGMENT:
The veveliic tas come wp in this appeal challenging the orders passed 3 | the Inconre Tax Appellate Tripura, Bangalore - 7 re A, No. GBC S0/tang/2004 dated 17.3.9006 rate sing the folloy vig subst uluiab questions of law:
Whether | (he Tribunal wes correct in holding freee he cor Track conleniplaang dedtetion Of fan at Sorreecentored iio beareent thi assessee cricl Me. Lakslunan fo purchase lanes form sites worded Rot attract the prowsions of Section | o4c cule COTE} of ihe Act care CONSCOMeHHELY to interest ender Section 2OMLAI was lew Iyable?"
mee Heard the learnect Counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.
by