Ita/315/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S. Mandavi Builders
High Court
22 Sep 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Ita/315/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S. Mandavi Builders
Date of order
22 Sep 2020
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Ita/315/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S. Mandavi Builders, the High Court (2020) 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.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020.
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND|
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
I.T.A. NO.315/2015
BETWEEN
1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R. BUILDING
QUEENS ROAD, MANGALORE-5/75001.
2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R. BUILDING
ATTAVARA, MANGALORE-5/5001.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,)
AND:
M/S. MANDAVI BUILDERSMANDAVI PALACE, END POINT ROAD.MANIPAL, UDUPI-576104PAN: AAOEFM 0540 P.
.. RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W
SRI. M. LAVA, ADV.) |
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT,1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 20.02.2015 PASSED IN [TA|NO.1734/BANG/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11,|PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:
(1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW.STATED ABOVE.
(II) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERPASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1734/BANG/2015|DATED 20-02-2015 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE|COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE!DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,|MANGALORE.
THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY,ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax|Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matterof the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2010-11.The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 01.03.2017 on the following substantialquestions of law:|
(I)Whether, on the facts and in_ thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunalwas right in holding that, unaccounted|Money,fOUNCTauringthesearcnproceedings and explained as on money|received, are eligible for deduction under|Section 80IB(10) of the Act?circumstances of the case, the Tribunalwas right in holding that, unaccounted|Money,fOUNCTauringthesearcnproceedings and explained as on money|received, are eligible for deduction under|Section 80IB(10) of the Act?
(iI)Whether, on the facts and in_ the
circumstances of the case, that the|Tribunal was right in holding — thattransactionsentered|into,with thebuyersofflats,are—eligiblefordeduction, even though there is violationof the sub-Sections(e) and (f) of SectionSOIB(10), on the ground that these|transactions were entered into before|the amendments to sub-Section (3) and|(f) of Section 80IB(10)?|
2 |For the reasons assigned by us in the orderpassed today in I.T.A.No.307/2015, the substantialquestions of law are answered against the revenue andin favour of the assessee.
In the result, the appeal fails and Is hereby|5-.;-..15.
SS|
Sd/-—JUDGE.Sd/-—JUDGE.
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.