Ita/867/2018 Of The Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax Cit(A) v. M/S Greenko Wind Projects Pvt Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA BETWEEN ITA No.867 OF 2018 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A)CENTRAL CIRCLE C R BUILDING QUEEN'S ROAD BANGALORE-560001 CENTRAL CIRCLE C R BUILDING QUEEN'S ROAD BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2) PRESENT ADDRESS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU-560001 CIRCLE-2(2) PRESENT ADDRESS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU-560001 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI ARAVIND K V, ADVOCATE) AND M/S GREENKO WIND PROJECTS PVT LTD SUIT NO.701 & 702 PRESTIGE MERIDIAN II M G ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 PAN:AAECG 3498H (RESPONDENT SERVED ) …RESPONDENT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29.06.2018 PASSED IN ITA NO. 15/BANG/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015, PRAYING 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. 15/BANG/2018 DATED 29.06.2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 ANNEXURE-C CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU AND ETC. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY P.S. DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal by the Revenue directed against the order dated 29.06.2018 passed in ITA No.15/BANG/2018 for Assessment year 2014-15,has been admitted to consider the following substantial question of law: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D of IT Rules, 1962, to the tune of Rs.3,95,75,001/- eventhough the conditions for invoking the said provision are satisfied in the case of assessee." 2. The question involved in this appeal came up for consideration before this Court in ITA No.133/2015 and this Court has answered the question against the Revenue. 3. Though served, none appears for the Respondents. 4. To a pointed question by the Court, Sri Aravind, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue does not dispute the position of law. 5. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed. The substantial question of law is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Appeal is disposed of. SD/- JUDGE SD/-JUDGE