Ita/38/2015 Of M/S Padmini Products (P) Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF OCTOBER 2020| PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASADILT.A. NO.38 OF 2015 BETWEEN: M/S. PADMINI PRODUCTS (P) LTD.,NO.157, K. KAMARAJ ROADBENGALURU - 56004)(REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR|SRI. PRABHU KIRAN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS|S/O LATE NAGARAJ N. VEMULKAR). ... APPELLAN[. (BY SRI. CHYTHANYA K.K. ADV.,) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCIRCLE-12(2), 14/3, 4 FLOORRASHTROTHANA BHAVANNRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT,1961L ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 14.11.2014 PASSED IN ITANO.242/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. (1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAWSTATED ABOVE. (II) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNEDORDER OF THE ITAT, BENGALURU “C’ BENCH BEARING IN ITA|NO.242/BANG/2013, DATED 14.11.2014| 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)Nas been preferred by the assessee. Tne subject matterof the appeal pertains to the Assessment years 2005-06to 2008-09. The appeal was admitted by a bench of thisCourt vide order dated 06.02.2015 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: (I)Whether on the facts and In the’circumstancesoftheCaSeé,theHonourable ITAT was right in law inupholdingtheactionofLearnedRespondentIn|re-openingtheassessment for the assessment year2009-10, under Section 14/7 of the ITAct in the absence of any tangiblematerial but merely on the basis ofdisallowance made in assessment year.2007-08? 2 |Learned counsel for the assessee submittedthat he does not want to press the appeal on substantialquestion of law No.1. For the reasons assigned by us in.the|order|passedtoday|In|assessee’sCA SCfor.Assessment Year 2005-06 in ITA No.154/2014, thesubstantial questions of law are answered in favour ofthe assessee. As a result, the order dated 14.11.2014 inrespect of Assessment Year 2009-10 is quashed. In theresult, the appeal is also allowed. Sd/-—JUDGE.Sd/-—JUDGE.