Ita/664/2013 Of M/S High Range Breweries Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THR 18 DAY OF AUGUST, 2014| P RBSEBEBNT THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KUMAR AN ID THR HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICK RATHNAKALA INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS.664;666 OF 2013 BETWEEN: M/S HIGH RANGE BREWERIES LTD(NOW MERGED WITHUNITED BREWERIES(HOLDINGS) LTDUB TOWERS, LEVEL 14, UB CITY,24 VITTAL MALLAY ROAD,BANGALORE-560001 _ APPBRLLANT(|(common in all Appeals) (BY SMT. S R ANURADHA, ADV.) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,|CIRCLE 12(5),REVISIONARY|PROCEEDINGS BHAVAN,|4TH FLOOR, 14/3, NRUPATUNGA ROAD,BANGALORE-56001 RBSPONDENT(common in all Appeals) THRESH INCOME TAX APPEALS ARE FILED UNDERSEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF| ORDER PASSED IN ITA NOS.156-158/BANG/2013, FORTHERE ASSHSSMENT YEARS 1990-91 TO 1992-93. PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO: 1.|FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OFLAW STATED ABOVE,LAW STATED ABOVE, IL.|ALLOW THR APPEAL AND SEI ASIDE THE ORDER.PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NOS.156-158/BANG/2013|ANI)CONSEQUENTIALLY|THERORDER OF THE CIT APPEALS VIDE ITA NOS.21 TO.23/C-12(5)/CIT(A)-TT/BANG/10-11 |DATED:20/11/2012)ANTITHERORDEROF|ASSESSING OFFICER DATED:29/12/2008 FOR THE|ASSESSMENT YEARS 1990-1991, 1991-1992 AND.19992-1993.PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NOS.156-158/BANG/2013|ANI)CONSEQUENTIALLY|THERORDER OF THE CIT APPEALS VIDE ITA NOS.21 TO.23/C-12(5)/CIT(A)-TT/BANG/10-11 |DATED:20/11/2012)ANTITHERORDEROF|ASSESSING OFFICER DATED:29/12/2008 FOR THE|ASSESSMENT YEARS 1990-1991, 1991-1992 AND.19992-1993. THERESE [TT APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDETHIS DAY,N. KUMAR J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - JUDGMENT These appeals are preferred by the assesseechallenging the order passed by the Tribunal which hasdeclined to grant total disallowance claimed by theaSSECSSECE. 2. In the earlier round of litigation, this Court) remanded the matter back to the Tribunal to produceevidence in support of their claim. Admittedly, theassesee did not avail the opportunity and did not - 3 - produce anyevidenceatterremand.Inthat.circumstances,theauthorities|have|recordedacategorical finding that the assessee is not entitled tototal disallowance as claimed. 3. In an identical order which was passed by theTribunal, another assessee had filed an appeal beforethis Court in ITA No.631/2013, which was dismissed on11.12.2013. For the same reasons, these appeals arealso liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, these appealsare dismissed. Sd/-JUDGE| Sd/-|JUDGE|