Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Ncr Corporation India P Ltd on 29 January, 2009
Bench: Deepak Verma, K.Ramanna
{N THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT'
EEATED THIS THE 29TH my 012' JANUAR'{*:2QQ9.._'__: T
PRESENT _ x V V
THE HQNBLE i'»*IR.JUS'I'f(1E::;1"_;E{f_§:f14';1'\,}%;' J.
THE HOFPBLE MR.JUۤ{fmE S
1.T.A.NQ.4»5S &% V% EETWEEH:
;_.'2'i-{E COMM£SSE.C3.NaER'_ = OFINCOM;«;--TAx; _ ' ::.ra.BU:LaINC,,-' ' QUEENS }T«?C:A;Z':, .;
BANGA3,,C}R'.E,V " "
2' THE: Aéssisfarfi'1':%::::m4:s«s§&3V;s;ER5 OFINCEOMAETAX _ -
CIRCLEW 12{ 2} C:.E-2.BUILD£:m«,... . QUEENS; ROAD, ..
_,BA29G:'a§,GR'E. , .. APPELLANTS V. LA * . _ {££Y_ S§§i .,i§§;§3.8ESHACHAIA, Ami; $392'-T' ___...--.-..........« M/s{ £539 Gcifiréafiéawion {Nam Pvmxm 'NITON i;§{JfLfiING, 3&9 .:'<'LOOf~2 ~ .« N-0.11', Fazgacg ROAD 'A "£:%.{aNG.¢;_L0§::E -« 560 052 ,. RESPGNBENT éiiii:
THIS {TA ES FELEIIF UXS. 2604i 0?' I.'I'.AC'F, I961 A17-HSENG "-..,__ }:::UT QF' 012932 QATEB 523/1:120:37 P2?-;SSE13* IN ms. W fan?
I'! debts can neither be termcé as rcserved not be tctmed as an umascertaizlccl therefore the mama cannot be ' V cemyuting the beak profits uf 64$"
Act?" A'
5. However, iaaznsd éézfiiscl fat' H1V'urthc;r V contended that the V haxéféliifady been answered by the Suprcmv;-, (52008) 305 ITR we ammxsmmfi mm mm svsmms the aforesaid question of law of the assesses and against I
6. Thug, it is~_11i£;._ irigét necessary for us to answer the V. ¢_saidV_q{;cst_io31vof %'.a_s__t;}:1e same has already been answered in '»:iTVc«:-I}/'.';v;§.s._:i.¢:>11 of tha Supsrcmc Court.
-- rcvrzniiz": is hérrtby tiismissed. Gf the matter, the appeal fflfid "by the Sd/-13 Tudgg Sfifa-3» Imfigg if Mvg