Ita/100194/2015 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri.siddeshwar Cooperative Credit Society Ltd

IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKADHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 2 DAY OK NOVEMBER 20106 PRESENT THE HON’BLEB MR. JUSTICEK ASHOK B. HINCHIGE AND THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINBSH KUMAR ITA NO.100194/2015 BBRTWREN 1.THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAXDR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEBEEBBELAGAVIOF INCOME TAXDR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEBEEBBELAGAVI 2.THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD-2(3), BELAGAVIWARD-2(3), BELAGAVI _.. APPELLANTS. (BY SRI Y V RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE.) ANT SHRI SIDDBSHWAR COOPBRATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LID.,P.B.ROAD, KAKATITQ: & DIST: BELAGAVI, —. RBSPONDBENT (BY SRI SANGRAM S KULKARNI, ADVOCATE.) THIS INCOMB TAX APPBAL IS FILBD UNDERSECTION 2600A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961PRAYING TO SEI ASIDE THERE ORDERS PASSED BY TINCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH,PANAJI, IN ITANO.110/PNJ/2015, DATED 30.77.201AND TO CONFIRM THR ORDEBR PASSHD BYTHRINCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BELAGAVI, ETC.., THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THISDAY,P.S.DINESH KUMAR,|J >DRLIVEREDTHEKOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Both learned counsel agree that the issueinvolved in this appeal is covered by an earlierjudgment of this Court in ITA No.100007/2016filed by the Revenue. The issue involved in thesaid appeal was similar to the issue in ITANo.100173/20105andITANo. L1OOQO080/2RevVenUehaschallengedtheOrder|1nNITANo.100080/2014before.theHon’blepupremeCourt. ITA No. 1OQO0Q0007/Was497?97704eranting liberty to the Revenue to revive the saidappeal if it succeeded in their SLP filed againstITA No.100080/2014. ?)ITA No.100173/2015 was disposed of by holding thus; “7. At this juncture, the learnedcounsel for the Revenue submittedthat the issue involved in thisappeal has been taken up in aspecial Leave Petition and _ tSame1spending|adjudicationbefore the Hon’ble Apex Court.On this premise, he prays forliberty to revive this appeal in theevent of the Revenue succeedingin the appeal/s filed before theApex Court. roHavingnoticedthat|theissue involved in this appeal isidentical|To|theissue.inITA1O0O080/2014, we have held thathisappeallacks|merit|anddeserves to be rejected withoutnoticeTo|the.respondent.However, this decision shall bebinding inter party even if theRevenue succeeds before the ApexCourt. Therefore, we considerthat the request made by _ tRevenue seeking leave to revivethis appeal as reasonable, g.In the result, the appealStands dismissed with liberty tothe Revenue to revive this appealin the event, Revenue succeeds inthe SLP filed before the ApexCourt on the same i1SSuU No costs.” 3.In the circumstances, this appeal is alsodismissedgrantinglibertyTOtheAppellantRevenue toTeViVEthisappealinthe0:03-appellants succeed in their SLP filed against ITANo.100080/2014- Ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/-JUDGE Mrk/- Sd/-JUDGE