By Sri. Y v. Ravi Raj, Advocate
High Court
12 Feb 2025 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
By Sri. Y v. Ravi Raj, Advocate
Date of order
12 Feb 2025
Assessment year(s)
2017-18, 2017-2018
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In By Sri. Y v. Ravi Raj, Advocate, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal.
Issue: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that assessee is entitled for set off of brought forward book loss in the computation of income under Section 115JB of the Act by relying on decision in the case of M/s.
Decision: The vehement submission of the learned Panel Counsel for the Revenue that the fact matrix of this case is bit in variance with the one in the cognate appeal, is difficult to agree with. - 4 - In view of the above, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and accordingly it is, costs having been made eas...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
Digitally signed byLAKSHMINARAYAN NLocation: High Court ofKarnataka
NC: 2025:KHC:6294-DBITA No. 189 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 189 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560095. 5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560095.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), 2 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095. CIRCLE-1(1)(1), 2 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. Y. V. RAVI RAJ, ADVOCATE)
AND:
M/S. ASIA POWER PROJECTS PVT. LTD, 4 LAKE SIDE RESIDENCY, NO.4, ANNASWAMY MUDALIAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 042. PAN: AADCA 0485B REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
…RESPONDENT
(BY MISS MANASA ANANTHAN, ADV. FOR SMT. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR, ADVOCATES.
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 27-02-2024 PASSED ITA NO.1140/BANG/2023 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6294-DB
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1140/BANG/2023 DATED 27.02.2024 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018 ANNEXURE-A CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT)
Revenue has challenged the Order dated 27[th]February, 2024 passed in ITA No.1140/Bang/2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. In the appeal memo, Revenue has framed the following substantial questions of
law:
"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that assessee is entitled for set off of brought forward book loss in the computation of income under Section 115JB of the Act by relying on decision in the case of M/s. BAIL vide ITA No.622/Bang/2014 and AMLINE TEXTILE (P) LTD. reported in 27 SOT 152 when the said decision has not reached finality?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that assessee is entitled for set
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6294-DBITA No. 189 of 2024
off of brought forward book loss in the computation of income under Section 115JB of the Act when the claim is contrary to the provision of Section 115JB and Board Circular No.495 dated 22.09.1987 and ignoring the application of explanation (iii) to the said Section?"
2. The subject matter of this Appeal is akin to the
one in ITA No.329 of 2017 between THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. Bangalore INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED, heard and disposed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19[th] September, 2022 in favour of the Assessee.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Assessee notifies to the Court that the challenge to the said order in SLP (Civil) Diary No.30145 of 2023 has been rejected by the Apex Court vide order dated 14[th] August, 2023. The vehement submission of the learned Panel Counsel for the
Revenue that the fact matrix of this case is bit in variance with the one in the cognate appeal, is difficult to agree with.
- 4 -
In view of the above, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and accordingly it is, costs having been made easy.
Sd/- (KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE
Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE
lnn List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.