Ita/255/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.k.raheja Development Corporation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURUDATBD THIS THR 13 DAY OF JANUARY, 2015 PRESENT THR HON' BLE MR. JUSTICK N. KUMAR ANT) THR HON' BLE MR. JUSTICEK B. VEBRAPPA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 2595/200 BERITIWE 1.)THR COMMISSIONBR OF INCOME-TAX CHRNTRAL CIRCLE C.R. BUILDING| QUEENS ROAD. BANGALORE. iaTHER ASST. COMMISSIONBR OF INCOMBE-TA CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) C.R. BUILDING| QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. .. APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADV.) ANT) M/S. K. RAHEJA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONNo.26/27, 13 FLOOR,RAHBJA TOWERS|M.G. ROAD, |BANGALORE -560 O0O1 ... RESPONDENT THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OFTHE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER)DATED|19.12.2008|PASSEDIN|ITANO.937/BNG/2008, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-2004 PRAYING TO FORMULATRKR THR SUBSTANTIAQUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND TO)ALLOW THR APPEAL AND SHIT ASIDE THE ORDERPASSEDBY|THEITATBANGALOREINITA.No.937/BNG/2008, DATED 19-12-2008, CONFIRMINGTHR ORDBR OF THR APPBLLATR COMMISSIONER|AN 1CONFIRMTHEORDERPASSEDBYTHEASSISTANTCOMMISSIONER.ORINCOMETAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE IN THE INTERESTOF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FORORDERS THIS DAY, N. KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE)FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The revenue has preferred this appeal against the)order passed by the Tribunal grantingrelief to the assesseefollowing the earlier judgment rendered in the case ofthe assessee itself. 2 |The substantial questions of law which arise for consideration in this appeal are as under: 1.Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that due to an award passed 2? 3. in Arbitration Proceedings betweenM/s.K.RahejaDevelopmentCorporation and M/s. Unique EstatesDevelopment Corporation and M/c.sea-Crust Properties Put. Ltd. wherethe Assessee was not a _ partyinterest was paid due to compellingTeCaSONSand.thereforeallowablededuction? Whether the Tribunal was correct inadmittingadditionalevidenceregardingthedispute|aboutanArbitration proceedings where _ thASSeESSECLUGSnot|FTpartyin.contravention of the principles ofNatural Justice and Tribunal Rules? Whether the Tribunal was correct innot examining the actual nature ofdispute and the manner in which theAssessee was connected to the samebefore proceeding to grant relief infavour of the Assessee? 3. This Court had an occasion to consider thesaid substantial questions of law in the assessee’s caseitself in ITA No.661/2007 decided on 18.08.2014 by aconsidered order of this Court aiter taking note ofearlier orders and the judgment of the Apex Court bysetting aside the said order. Following the saidjudgments, the impugned order is also required to beset aside and the substantial questions of law are to beanswered in favour of the revenue and against theassessee. Accordingly, we pass the following: ORDER The appeal is allowed. | Parties to bear their own costs. Sbs* SId/-. JUDGE| sd/-JUDGE