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 3, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Sabir Salim Ahmed vs The Income Tax Officer on 26 September, 2012

Bench: K.Sreedhar Rao, B.Manohar

                              1


    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

    DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012

                           PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO

                            AND

          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR

                  I.T.A. No.178 OF 2011

BETWEEN:-

Sri Sabir Salim Ahmed,
Aged about 45 years,
S/o. Sri Salim Ahmed,
No.E-204, Ranka Corner,
Cambridge Layout,
Ulsoor,
Bangalore - 560008.
                                                   Appellant
(By Sri S. Parthasarathi, Advocate)

AND:-

The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-11(1), R.P. Bhavan,
Nrupathunga Road,
Bangalore-560001.
                                                 Respondent
(By Sri K.V. Aravind, Advocate)

       This I.T.A. is filed U/s.260-A of the I.T. Act, 1961
arising out of Order dated 21.01.2011 passed in ITA
No.941/Bang/2010, for the Assessment Year 2006-2007,
praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein
                                2


and (ii) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by
the ITAT Bangalore in ITA No.941/Bang/2010, dated
21.01.2011, in the interest of justice and equity.

    This appeal is coming on for hearing this day,
SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following:


                      JUDGMENT

In view of the decision of this court in the case of FATHIMA BAI VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (2009) 32 DTR (KAR) 243, the question of law framed is answered in favour of the assessee. The question of law framed is as under:

"Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- made by the appellant in a bank account before the due date for filing the return of income is not eligible for deduction under s.54 of the Act under the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case?"

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE psg*