Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Karnataka State Ware Housing ... on 24 June, 2010
Bench: N.K.Patil, B.V.Nagarathna
IN TIE HIGH I COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 24?" DAY OF JUNE, 2010. 2 PRESENT : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.PAi'Ii§ A' AND THE I-ION'BLE MRS. JUSTICE _ 1.T.A.No,7o1 0F'--:»':_o09 BETWEEN : E. vc1rWc1e»i;1(5 'e'é£E;: The Commissioneaof Income: C.R.Bui1ding, ~ " Queens road, 1 Bangalore; V " The Assistant_ Co'1nn21:ssio.;:er of Ineome- Tax, Bfi11d:ngV,"" Bangalore. " ' ... Appeliant Aravind' and Sri. M.V. Seshachala, Advocates) M Karnataka State Warehousing Corporation, ~~ No.43, Prime Rose Road, V. ..71961, VBanga1ore--56() O25. Respondent **$* This ITA is filed U/s. 260A of the Income Tax Act, praying to formulat the substantial question of law, allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, in ETA No. 200/Bang/2009 dated 28.5.2009 and confirm th.'&*.QT.Cl€'T of the Appellate Commissioner confirming the orci_er__passe_d by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,.--:__Cirele&----1p1:(.5};, Bangalore. This ITA coming on fo'rHmAdmispsionn"?:i1is'--:l«'day, N.K.PATIL J., delivered the folloW3Af1§I1''*.. ' ' :3 U'l_")~_§} T .
This appeal by the is out of the impugned order datedaath :li»iey~tij.:>;oee passed in ITA No.2OO / Bang 2(__)O9 ;"by~ it Tax Appellate Tribur1al,__. the following question of'::,_ ~~ Tribunal was correct in holding that -fthe'-..___Warehousing rental charges received by the'iasse'ssee is assessable under the head irlleomel' from business and not under the 'Ihead income,fr__orn house property?
it '%iVfe.--:'haVe heard the learned counsel for the appe11ante~" Sri. K.V. Aravind for some time.
"3... After careful perusal of the materials available '.lo'r'1"ii1e, it emerges that, appellants have not produced A "'"the permission taken fr the Committee of Disputes W_'w'____,,.../-
for filing this appeal as per the decision in ONGC's case. Without producing the permission from the Committee of Disputes. the appellants cannot appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by liable to be dismissed as not:'Jmai'nta'inable," «reservirig liberty to them to redress. their'grieVance_"_or1"thsv.Is'ame, cause of action after takinl"'e'a»neeessar*f ermilssion from . J l . 3 the Committee of D'1sp'AteS}. if._a.dv-ised need arises. Ordered accordingly.__ ll t1p e i e r Sd/-
jli§plflflfl7" JUDGE Sc!/-' JUDGE