M/S Mangalore Electricity Supply ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1431 Kant

                                1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                         PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

                               AND

  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY

                   I.T.A. NO.107 OF 2013
BETWEEN:

M/S. MANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD.,
REP. BY ITS FINANCIAL ADVISER
SRI. K. JAYARAM ALVA
PARADIGM PLAZA
A.B. SHETTY CIRCLE
PANDESHWAR, MANGALORE.
                                            ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR
    SRI. M. LAVA, ADV.,)

AND:

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
CIRCLE 2(1), II FLOOR
CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING ANNEXE
ATTAVAR, MANGALORE.
                                           ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.)
                             ---
      THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX
ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31.10.2012 PASSED
IN ITA NO.1118/BANG/2009, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-
07, PRAYING TO:
      (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW
STATED THEREIN.
      (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO
THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY
                             2



THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1118/BANG/2009 DATED 31.10.2012,
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

     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 Tax

Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)

has been preferred by the assessee. The subject matter

of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2006-07.

The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide

order dated 16.07.2013 on the following substantial

questions of law:

(i) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the disallowance of Rs.54,84,85,143/- being deduction claimed under section 80IA(4)(iv)(c) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case?

(ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in denying deduction under section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case?

(iii) without prejudice, whether the

Tribunal was justified in law in denying the deduction claimed by the appellant under Section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) of the Act after holding that the appellant is entitled to claim deduction from 1.4.2005 on network of a new transmission or distribution line on the facts and circumstances of the case?

(iv) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the appellant is not entitled for depreciation on the consumer contribution and the said assets are used for the business and maintained by the assessee on the facts and circumstances of the case?"

2. Today, the appeal is admitted on the

following additional substantial question of law:

(v) 'Whether the provisions of Section 115JB of the Act is applicable to the appellant company for the impugned Assessment Year 2006-07 on the fact and circumstances of the case?

3. At the outset learned Senior counsel for the

assessee submitted that the appellant does not press

substantial question of law No.4. Therefore, it is not

necessary for us to deal with the same.

4. For the reasons assigned by us in the

judgment passed today in I.T.A.No.204/2013, the

substantial questions of law framed by a bench of this

court are answered in favour of the assessee and

against the revenue. In the result, the order passed by

the tribunal dated 04.07.2012 insofar as it contains

findings against the assessee is hereby quashed.

In the result, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE ss