Ita/692/2017 Of The Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Smt Deepika

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 PRESENT HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.692 OF 2017 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIT(A) 5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 095. 5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 095. 2. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3), PRESENT ADDRESS WARD-2(2)(4) 2 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 095. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI ARAVIND K.V., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. DEEPIKA C/o M/s. T M MARKETING (INDIA) 12, GROUND FLOOR, TULSI PLAZA S.V. LANE, 3 CROSS, CHICKPET BENGALURU – 560 053. PAN: ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI BALRAM R. RAO, ADVOCATE) --- THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 09.03.2017, PASSED IN ITA NO.1590/BANG/2014, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1590/BANG/2014 DATED 09.03.2017 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(4), BENGALURU AND ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellants has frankly pointed out that the other co-related appeal, being ITA No.695/2017 against the common order dated 09.03.2017 in relation to ITA No.1618/Bang/2014, has been considered and dismissed by this Court on 21.06.2018. In the said judgment, this Court has, inter alia, held as under: “3. In view of the aforesaid, the Tribunal found that there was no concealment on the part of the Assessee, attracting penalty under Section 271[1][c] of the Act. Such cogent and reasonable findings of facts by the learned Tribunal and consequentially set aside the penalty under Section 271[1][c] of the Act does not give rise to any substantial question of law requiring consideration by this Court under Section 260-A of the Act. 4. The Appeal filed by the Revenue is thus found to be without merit and liable to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs.” The consideration aforesaid directly applies to the present appeal too filed in relation to ITA No.1590/Bang/2014 against the common order dated 09.03.2017. Therefore, following the decision aforesaid and in the same terms, this appeal also stands dismissed. Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE