By Mr. Aravind v. Chavan, Adv

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15[TH|]DAY OF JANUARY 2071PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’‘’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASW A1LT.A. NO.592 OF 2017 BETWEEN: 1.|PR, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-S60001.| 2.|DY, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX| CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R. BUILDING| QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.| (BY MR. E.R. INDRAKUMAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W| MR. SANMATHI E.I. ADV.,). _... APPELLANTS AND" M/S. G7 INVESTMENTS PVT LTD.,NO.86, GOKUL TOWERSM.S. RAMAIAH ROADBANGALORE-5600274PAN: AABCGO4Y9OP, (BY MR. ARAVIND V. CHAVAN, ADV.,) .., RESPONDENT THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX|ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 15.02.2017 PASSEDIN ITA NO.1647/BANG/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW.AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY _ BFORMULATED BY THE HON BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SET! ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 15-02-2017 PASSED BY THE.INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B' BENCH, BANGALORE, IN-APPEAL|PROCEEDINGSNO.ITA.NO.1647/BANG/2016—FOR.ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEALAND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THEINTEREST OF JUSTICE. | THIS|1LT.A. COMING ONFORORDERS,THISDAY,ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: | JUDGMENT Mr.E.R.Indrakumar, learned Senior counsel along with|Mr.E.I.Sanmatni, learned counsel for the revenue. Mr.Aravind V.Chavan, learned counsel for the assessee. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (nereinafter referred to as the Act, for snort) nas|been filed by the revenue. The subject matter of the appealpertains to the Assessment Year 2011-12. Tne appeal wasadmitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated|05.11.2018 on the following substantial question of law: "WhetherOP)thefactsandInthecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was|right in holding that the shares received|against tne less consideration in comparison|to fair market value are not liable to tax as|income under Section 56(2)(vi-a)(ii) of the|Act?” 2. When the matter was taken up today, learnedcounsel for the assessee submitted that the substantialquestion of law involved in this appeal has already beenanswered by tnis Court vide order dated 15.12.2020 passedin ITA No.501/2016 against the revenue and in favour of theaSse@ess€e 3 Learned Senior counsel! for the revenue was unable|to dispute the statement made by the assessee. 4 In view of the aforesaid submission and for the.reasons assigned in the judgment dated 15.12.2020 passedin ITA No.501/2016, the substantial question of law framedin this appeal is answered against the revenue and in favourof the assessee. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/-JUDGE RV| Sd/-JUDGE