Ita/100030/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.pragathi Gramina Bank
High Court
14 Dec 2015 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · karhcdharwad
Parties
Ita/100030/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.pragathi Gramina Bank
Date of order
14 Dec 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/100030/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.pragathi Gramina Bank, the High Court (2015) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THB HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATEBD THIS THE 1 DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMARITA No. JQGOGO3O OF 2
BRIWEHEN
ITHERE COMMISSIONER OF [INCTAX, SEDAM ROAD,TAX, SEDAM ROAD,
GULBARGA.
~THE DEBEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX,INCOME TAX,
CIRCLE-I, BELLARY.
_.. APPBLLANTS
(BY SRI Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV.)
ANT
M/S. PRAGATHI GRAMINA BANK,(AMALGAMATED BANK OFTUNGABHADRA GRAMEENA BANK)HEAD OFFICE, SANGANAKAL ROAD,GANDHINAGAR, BELLARY.
_.. RESPONDE
(BY SRI S.PARTHASARATHI & SRI H.R.KAMBIYAVAR, ADVS.)
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION QJ6O0A OF TINCOME TAX ACT, 1961 TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSEDBY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALROE,BENCH-A, BANGALOE IN ITA NO.229/BANG/2012 DTD.10.01.2014 AND BIC.
THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,S.ABDULNAZEER.J.>DRBLIVBRRTHR FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel appearing for the parties agree
that the point in issue is covered by the decision of this
Court in ITA No.100014/14 C/w ITA No.100013/14,
disposed of on 14.12.2015,
Following the said decision, this appeal is alsodismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
KLY/
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.
EaseValue