Shri v. Dineshreddy (Huf)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2071.PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’‘’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASW AILT.A. NO.283 OF 2014 BETWEEN: 1.|COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-II]| C.R. BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE560001. 2.|DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCIRCLE 6(1), C.R. BUILDINGSCIRCLE 6(1), C.R. BUILDINGS QUEEN'S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. (BY SRI. E.R. INDRAKUMAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.,) .., APPELLANTS~ AND" SHRI. V. DINESH|REDDY (HUF) NO.44/4, FAIR FIELD LAYOUTRACE COURSE ROADBANGALORE.PAN: AABHVO511LL ~. RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK A. KULKARNI, ADV.)| THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. J6O0-A OF INCOME TAXACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 14.02.2014 PASSEDIN ITA NO.712/BANG/2013 AND C.O. NO.3/BANG/2014 FOR THE.ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, PRAYING TO: (1) DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR-SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BYTHE HON BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT.(ii) SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 14.02.2014|PASSED BY THE ITAT, A BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEALPROCEEDINGSNO,|LITANO.712/BANG/ 2013AND|C.O.,NO.3/BANG/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR’ HEARING, THIS’ DAY, | ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: | JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)nas been preferred by the revenue. The subject matterof the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2006-07.The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 15.12.2014 on the following substantial|question of law: “Whether, on tne facts and in_ thecircumstances of tne case, the Tribunal wasjustified in law in holding that the transfer ofshares of NCSPL to Godrej Group is not liable|to LTCG tax In the hands of the shere holderswhen it is very clear that tne first agreement:forSale.ofsharesWasentered|and|subsequentlyseries oftransactionswere| artificially created to avoid tax using closelyheld defunct firm and companies to route the.transaction?”.— 2 |For the reasons assigned by us in thejudgmentpassed|today|In|I.T.A.No.291/13,.thesubstantial question of law framed by a bench of this.court is answered against the revenue and in favour ofthe assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in.this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/-JUDGE. SS| Sd/-JUDGE.