THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. M/S VIDYASHILP (I) PVT LTD

ITA/1078/2008

AI Insights

The appeals filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax against M/s. Vidyashilp (I) Pvt. Ltd. concern the proper apportionment of income between business and other sources for the assessment year 2003-04. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had previously remanded the matter to the assessing authority, which led to these appeals. The High Court, referencing a related appeal (ITA No. 1059/2008), decided to remit the matter back to the assessing authority without addressing the substantial questions of law, allowing for a comprehensive re-evaluation of all issues involved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 728947 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: A SHANKAR; M LAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Keywords: Assessment year 2003-04; Income from Business; Income from house property; Income tax appeal; Remand to Assessing Authority
• Section: 260-A

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 13th day of October, 2014 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR ITA No.1078 of 2008 c/w ITA No.1077 of 2008 In ITA No.1078 of 2008 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C. R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore 2. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3) C. R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore …Appellants (By Sri K. V. Aravind, Advocate) AND: M/s. Vidyashilp (I) Pvt. Ltd., No.43/3, Shivanna Halli 2 Yelahanka Hobli Bangalore …Respondent (By Sri A. Shankar & M. Lava, Advocates) This ITA filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 08-07-2008 passed in Cob No.1/Bang/2008 (In ITA No.1122/BNG/2007), for the Assessment year 2003-04, praying to (i) formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein; (ii) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT Bangalore in Cob No.1/Bang/2008 (In ITA No.1122/BNG/2007, dated 08-07-2008 confirm the orders of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(3), Bangalore. In ITA No.1077 of 2008 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C. R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore 2. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3) C. R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore …Appellants (By Sri K. V. Aravind, Advocate) AND: M/s. Vidyashilp (I) Pvt. Ltd., No.43/3, Shivanna Halli Yelahanka Hobli Bangalore …Respondent (By Sri A. Shankar & M. Lava, Advocates) 3 This ITA filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 08-07-2008 passed in ITA No.1122/BNG/2007, for the Assessment year 2003-04, praying to (i) formulate the substantial question of law stated therein; (ii) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT Bangalore in ITA No.1122/BNG/2007, dated 08-07-2008 confirm the orders of the Appellate Commissioner and of Income Tax, Circle-12(3), Bangalore. These ITAs coming on for hearing this day, N. KUMAR J delivered the following: J U D G M E N T The revenue has preferred these appeals against the order passed by the Tribunal which has remanded the matter to the assessing authority for consideration afresh the apportionment of the income between income from business or from other source. Against the very same order, the assessee had preferred an appeal in ITA No. 1059/2008. The said appeal came to be disposed of with the following observation: “5. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant made a prayer that all the issues arising in the matter be left open to be considered by the Assessing Officer after remand, so that the appellant would be able to canvass all the facts 4 before the Assessing Officer. Prayer appears to be reasonable. We make it clear that all the issues should be clarified by the Assessing Officer and both parties would be at liberty to urge their contentions before the Assessing Officer. Since we have referred to the gray area in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, that needs clarification, no substantial question needs to be answered by us in this appeal. Matter stands disposed of with the above observations.” 2. It is submitted that these appeals also be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order. 3. The question to be considered by the assessing authority is, whether the income of the assessee is to be computed under the head income from business or house property or from partly business or partly house property. 4. As already held by this Court in the aforesaid judgment, all questions are left open to be agitated before the assessing authority with supporting material. Thereafter, the 5 assessing authority shall decide the dispute in the light of the observations made above and in accordance with law. In that view of the matter, we are not answering the substantial questions which are framed in these appeals. Hence, we pass the following order:- (a) The impugned orders are set aside. (b) The matter is remitted to the assessing authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Accordingly, the appeals are disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE ckl/- "