Granite Mart Limited, Bangalore V. ITO, Bangalore

ITA 1166/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9364 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TSHERING ONGDA
• Assessee Lawyers: VASANTH KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL BANGALORE BENCH SMC, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1263 TO 1266(BANG) 2016 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 10 TO 2012 13) THE ITO, WARD - 3, SHIVAMOGGA APPELLANT VS M/S KPTCL EMPLOYEES CO OP SOCIETY, BALARAJ URS ROAD, SHIVAMOGGARAICHUR ROLLER FLOUR MILLS, C/O K. R. PRASAD, ADVOCATES & TAX CONSULTANTS, BHARAT APARTMENTS, GROUND FLOOR, 44/1, FAIRFIELD LAY OUT, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE 560001 PAN : AAAAK9227A RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VASANTH KUMAR, C. A. REVENUE BY : SHRI TSHERING ONGDA, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 11-08-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16-09-2016 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.: ALL THESE FOUR APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE. THESE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST FOUR SEPARATE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT (A), DA VANGERE ALL DATED 26.02.2016 FOR A. Y. 2009 10 TO 2012 13 AND FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, ALL THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDE R. 2. IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS ABOUT RELIEF ALLOWED BY LEARNED CIT (A) BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P (2) (A) (I). ITA NO. 1263 TO 1266 (BANG) 2016 2 3. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSME NT ORDERS. 4. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF CIT (A). HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT (A) HAS FOLLOWED TH E JUDGMENT OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF TUMKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CREDIT CO OPERATIVE LIMITED VS. ITO IN ITA NO. 307 OF 2014 DATED 28.10.2014. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. I FIND THA T AS PER THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE, THE CASE OF THE RE VENUE IS THIS THAT IN TWO CASES, SLP HAS BEEN FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN SUPR EME COURT AGAINST TWO JUDGMENTS OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED ON SIMILAR ISSUE BUT THIS IS NOT A CASE OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT THESE JUD GMENTS OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ARE REVERSED OR STAYED BY HON BLE APEX COURT. NO DIFFERENCE IN FACTS ALSO IS POINTED OUT BY THE LEAR NED DR OF THE REVENUE. HENCE, I FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT (A). 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR APPEALS OF THE REVE NUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. (A.K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : 16.09.2016 AM* ITA NO. 1263 TO 1266 (BANG) 2016 3 COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S. .. 4 DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S. .. 6. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBS ITE .. 7. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO . 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. DATE ON WHICH ORDER DOES FOR XEROX & ENDORSEMENT . 10. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 11 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER. 12 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE DISPATCH SEC TION FOR DISPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER 13 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDE R