The Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Bhagwan Mahaveer Memorial Jain ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2689 Kant

                                1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

                         PRESENT

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

                               AND

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

                    I.T.A. NO.2 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

1.     THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
       EXEMPTIONS, 6TH FLOOR
       UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE
       MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU-560027.

2.     THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
       EXEMPTIONS PRESENT ADDRESS
       DCIT EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1
       6TH FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE
       MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU-560027.

                                              .... APPELLANTS
(BY MR. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,)

AND:

BHAGWAN MAHAVEER MEMORIAL JAIN
EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL TRUST
NO.285, 2ND FLOOR, ESWARI MANSION
AVENUE ROAD, BENGALURU-560002
PAN-AABTS 1497G.
                                              ... RESPONDENT
(BY MR. SHARATH S, ADV., FOR
    MR. TATA KRISHNA, ADV.,)
                            ---
                               2



      THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX
ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 21.08.2019 PASSED
IN ITA NO.1731/BANG/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-
12, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL AND SET ASIDE
THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1731/BANG/2016 DATED:21.08.2019 FOR
ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ANNEXURE-C AND CONFIRM THE
ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU.

     THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                        JUDGMENT

Heard.

This appeal is admitted on the following substantial

question of law:

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Tribunal has erred in allowing the claim of the assessee for carry forward of deficit, ignoring the fact that there is no express provision in the Income Tax Act 1961 allowing such claim, and without appreciating the fact that this would have the effect of granting double benefit to the assessee, first as accumulation of income under section 11(1)(a) or corpus donation under section 11(1)(d) in earlier/current year, or exempt income under section 10(34), and then as application of income under section 11(1)(a) in subsequent years which is legally not permissible?"

Learned counsel for the assesee submits that the

aforesaid substantial question of law has been answered in

his favour vide judgment dated 20.01.2021 passed in ITA

No.80/2016. On the other hand, learned counsel for the

revenue could not dispute the aforesaid submission.

In view of the aforesaid submissions and for the

reasons assigned in the judgment dated 20.01.2021 in ITA

No.80/2016, the substantial question of law is answered

against the revenue.

In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal,

the same fails and is hereby dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

ss