Ita/317/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S. Mandavi Builders

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.317/2015 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.1787/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 ABOVE. (II) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS)PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1787/BANG/2015|DATED 20-02-2015 CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE|COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING 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 2011-12. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 31.05.2016 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|dismissed. SS| Sd/-JUDGE. Sd/-JUDGE.