Ita/316/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S. Mandavi Builders

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURUDATED 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.316/2015 BETWEEN: 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAXCENTRAL CIRCLE.CENTRAL CIRCLE. C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE -5/5 OOL.. 2 |THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAXCENTRAL CIRCLE-C.R.BUILDINGATTAVARAMANGALORE - 5/5 OOL.. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. MANDAVI BUILDERSMANDAVI PALACEEND POINT ROADMANIPALUDUPI 5/76 104| ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.LA.SHANKAR SR. ADV.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.1735/BANG/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12,|PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:(1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW.STATED THEREIN.» (1) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERPASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1735/BANG/2015|CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER|AND|CONFIRMTHEORDER|PASSEDBY|THE|DEPUTY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MANGALORE. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL 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 2011-12. 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|MONney,foundduringthesearchproceedings, 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|MONney,foundduringthesearchproceedings, and explained as on money|received, are eligible for deduction under|Section 80IB(10) of the Act? (iI)Whether on the facts and In thecircumstances of the case, that the|Tribunal was right in holding — thattransactionsentered|into,with thebuyers of flats, are eligible for deductionbeen tnough there is violation of the|sub-Sections (3) and 9f) of Section|80IB(10), on the ground that these|transactions were entered into before|the amenaments to sub-Section (e) and|(f) of Section 80IB(10)?|circumstances of the case, that the|Tribunal was right in holding — thattransactionsentered|into,with thebuyers of flats, are eligible for deductionbeen tnough there is violation of the|sub-Sections (3) and 9f) of Section|80IB(10), on the ground that these|transactions were entered into before|the amenaments to sub-Section (e) 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 substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue andin favour of the assessee. In the result, the appeal fails and Is hereby|dismissed. SS| Sd/-—JUDGE.Sd/-JUDGE.