By Sri K v. Aravind, Advocate

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 13[th]day of October, 2014 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR ANTI THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR| ITA No.1078 of 2008 c/wITA No.1077 of 2008 In ITA No.1078 ot 2JOO BETWEEN: 1.)The Commissioner of Income Tax C. R. Building, Queens Road| Bangalore iaThe Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3) C. R. Building, Queens Road| Bangalore.. Appellant (By Sri K. V. Aravind, Advocate) AND: M/s. Vidyashilp (I) Pvt. Ltd.,_No.43/3, Shivanna Halli o Yelahanka Hobl1Bangalore ... Respondent (By Sri A. Shankar & M. Lava, Advocates) This ITA filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961|arising out of order dated O8-07-2008 passed in Cob)No.1/Bang/2008 (In ITA No.1122/BNG/2007), for the|Assessment year 2003-04, praying to (i) formulate the|substantial questions of law stated therein; (ii) allow the|appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT Bangalorein Cob No.1/Bang/2008 (In ITA No.1122/BNG/2007, dated |O8-07-2008confirmthe.ordersotthe|AppellateCommissioner and confirm the order passed by the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(3), Bangalore. In ITA No.1077 of 2008 BBRTW BB Ll.The Commissioner ot Income Tax. C. R. Building, Queens Road| Bangalore iaThe Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3) C. R. Building, Queens Road| Bangalore.. Appellant (By Sri K. V. Aravind, Advocate) AND: M/s. Vidyashilp (I) Pvt. Ltd.,_No.43/3, Shivanna HalliYelahanka Hobl1Bangalore ... Respondent (By Sri A. Shankar & M. Lava, Advocates)| 3 This ITA filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961.arising out of order dated 08-07-2008 passed in ITA|No.1122/BNG/2007, tor the Assessment year 2003-04,|praying to (i) formulate the substantial question of law statedtherein; (11) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed|by the ITAT Bangalore in ITA No.1122/BNG/2007, dated |08-07-2008contirmtheordersottheAppellate|Commissioner and of Income Tax, Circle-12(3), Bangalore. TheseITAScomingOf}for.hearingthisN. KUMAR J‘delivered the following: day, JU DBGMENT The revenue has preferred these appeals against the|order passed by the Tribunal which has remanded thematter to the assessing authority tor consideration afreshthe apportionment of the income between income frombusiness or from other source. Against the very same order,the assessee had preferred an appeal in ITA No. 1059/2008. The said appeal came to be disposed of with the following|observation: “Oo. At the outset, learned counsel for theappellant made a prayer that all the issues.arising in the matter be left open to be consideredby the Assessing Officer after remand, so that theappellant would be able to canvass all the facts v before the Assessing Officer. Prayer appears to bereasonable. We make it clear that all the issuesShould be clarified by the Assessing Officer andboth parties would be at liberty to urge theircontentions before the Assessing Officer. Since wehave referred to the gray area in the impugnedorder passed by the Tribunal, that needsclarification, no substantial question needs to beanswered by us in this appeal. Matter standsdisposed of with the above observations.” 2. Itis submitted that these appeals also be disposed|of in terms of the aforesaid order. | 3. The question to be considered by the assessing|authority is, whether the income of the assessee is to becomputed under the head income from business or houseproperty or from partly business or partly house property. 4. As already held by this Court in the aforesaid|judgment, all questions are left open to be agitated before theassessing authority with supporting material. Thereafter, the assessing authority shall decide the dispute in the light of|the observations made above and in accordance with law. [In|that view of the matter, we are not answering the substantialquestions which are framed in these appeals. Hence, wepass the following order:- (aThe impugned orders are set aside. (b)The matter ts remitted to the assessing authority for 3. The question to be considered by the assessing|authority is, whether the income of the assessee is to becomputed under the head income from business or houseproperty or from partly business or partly house property. 4. As already held by this Court in the aforesaid|judgment, all questions are left open to be agitated before theassessing authority with supporting material. Thereafter, the assessing authority shall decide the dispute in the light of|the observations made above and in accordance with law. [In|that view of the matter, we are not answering the substantialquestions which are framed in these appeals. Hence, wepass the following order:- (aThe impugned orders are set aside. (b)The matter ts remitted to the assessing authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Accordingly, the appeals are disposed of. ckl/-| Sd/-JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE|