Ita/550/2015 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Shriram Chits

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE / DAY OF DECEMBER 27070PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD BETWEEN: ILT.A. NO.550 OF Z2O1 1.|COMMISSIONER OF INCOME. TAX, C.R. BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2.|DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE|12(3), BANGALORE.OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE|12(3), BANGALORE. (BY SRI.E.I. SAMATHI, ADV.,) .., APPELLANTS. AND" M/S SHRIRAM CHITS (KARNATAKA)PVT. LTD., NO.259/31,| FLOOR, 10 CROSS,WILSON GARDEN,BANGALORE- 560 O27 7PVT. LTD., NO.259/31,| FLOOR, 10 CROSS,WILSON GARDEN,BANGALORE- 560 O27 7 .., RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.V. SHESHACHALA SENIOR COUNSEL FORSRI. BALRAM R.RAO., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT). THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT,1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31.05.2011 PASSED IN ITA.NO.1224/BANG/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97,PRAYING TO: (1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW.STATED THEREIN.» (11) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED.31.05.7011.PASSEDBYTHE|ITAT,BANGALORE INITANO.1224/BANG/2010 AND CONFIRM THE ORDERR PASSED BY THE.JT. COMMISSIIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE, IN THEINTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: | JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (nereinafter referred to as the Act for short)nas been preferred by the revenue. The subject matterof the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2009-10.The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 09.06.2016 on the following substantialquestions of law:| a) Whether on the facts and in the)circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was|justified in law in allowing the bid loss without|appreciating the fact that such Bid Loss|pertains to period beyond the accounting|period relevant to the assessment year under|consideration and the same should not heavebeen allowed for the sake of consistency”: D)|"WhetherOf)thefactsand|circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was|justified in law in placing reliance on its own.order in the case of DHFL Vysya Housing|FinancePpLtd.,(DVHF)TTA|No.1416/bang/2010.for.Ay96-97dated:11.01.72013andholdingthat|thereopening under section 14/7 Is bad in lawwitnoutappreciatingthefactthat|theagepartment has not accepted the relied upondecisionand|theSa frhasalsobeenChallenged before this Hon'ble High Court of|Karnataka in ITA No.244/2013?" 2D For the reasons assigned by us in the.judgment passed today in I.T.A.No.66/2012, it is notnecessary for us to answer the substantial questions oflaw. In the result, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/-—JUDGE. SS| Sd/-—JUDGE.