.nnTwi.4"tm--» V 'Y:
% 1
T THE HON'BLE M'R;...iUS'fIC§E:V'.
%\1%A§:[m BYRAREDDY
. The%_Commisai<inI§!'.6i''' -. .. ~ « .
In.«.:t,im¢L:'s'»~'_!_Za:.:j C'; R; Afluiliji-fig
Avsavar .7'
v.Evi§ingaium=S'75s .0131 . T
.' The Officer
.--.11r;.m.1'-.. i' ~. .
' V'l"fl-1%.!'-".,.l ,
.7 Tiavéerfi "
_ Mis:aionvHospilul'Road
L-'d::p§:.r 5'75 191
my V. Seshachala. Advocate)
Relief Society of
Soiith Kafiaiifi
Univ¢rsi1_y{Bui1aing
R ., _ Sari-.
5"' Floor, Madhav Nagar
Manipal
1'T|l"\I~.llJl\'i..I' ' _
_-- _\..r'v-',J'J.\'.i~l.V\"1'1J'.I'-iv 9
(By Shri. G. Safangan, Senior Advooate forfifofii. id
ITA.-s are filed under 2604A ofxi.
a.ris__=.i.ag_ out of ordgr _2.3=04=2Cr{.)2"';;;a_s@"i33..IT.A-3 No, 1075!
Bung/1995 in rm No. 333120-92 %_a9au-A 119.2.26629 passed in
"HA No. '734/'Bang/''i99§ ' 9:: tine Assessment year 1993-94
re.¢P%ctivc|)*. ' V V " -.
"mu m'.":.n- ' .._.:L-1--.,=Z.:1".';-,.:.".'.. 6?: .1... ur....m. 'n... A.,.
W In _1Va._111gen .u.uu'm e_DUlr|.!§.|Il~..£»l.f"\. u1 um. wcuuu nu-L nu,
1957 arising ;:mt"99b1Td zneodjddorcuero causes; 23.4.2002 passed in
WTA.No,_} 3/3anga1993%tmhe agscssment year 1991-92.
on -for Hearing this day, DEE]-'AK
VERMA defiv¢fa§lVthe..follGwing:-
'_ ' f"'.fv'.Seshauhaia for 'tho uppeiianis. Shri Gfiarangan,
dd. Sml.Vani H., for the respondents.
order shallulso govem disposal of ITA.No.l65/2003
find-§WTA.No.30/2002 which arise out of the coromon order dated
‘i3.4.2002 the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal in
YFIWI ‘IT Il’\FIEII’I H\E I’ AI IJ\.l’\I (IL C
11 .mo.1u:;m:sangzv3 10:’ me assessment your 1991- .4 and
‘A
U
Act, 1961
following substantial questions o1’la\v_sf:….. _e V
“1. Whether the Tribunal tn.hhottii,.#é:~e..,,’Vi
% that the uonulusiun at’-._.f¢’3r
assessment years should be’ eppiieebie teeeuee
current assessirhent 1. titrithout
_ independently recuftlihg ‘ta; figevhhgld by the
Hon’ble_ Stt’p!Bm§g”VC{3ttft i:hC2g4 310 before
granting§v§xéih1pfi’oh ttreficr (22A) of the
ttj.,d6§ctingVva.;if_h:’bf Rs. ‘7”,S5,”§?.9!’- national
interest ievieci ‘assessing ufiicer at 14% on _u
slim {if “~Rs, ____ __..’,G3,%,%G:’- in Sri.
uayeraefiiia Pas anti 3*: Shudhkahfi it’: pure.hee.e.-
3. Whether the Assessing Officc; was correct in
holding- that the assessee was a_ -r_tiere- fiunt for
Kasturibha Medical Foundation’ which was
enjoying all: the benefits frum the asaessw that and
“”””–41
L/J.7>
tl” %-as-‘..e was :14… t.’…rrving 1.1.! its ae!iv_i_ty””f:)1j~–._,: 5 0
Philanhuwepie p-.:rg,v.\se .111. L— __t.1_ , nut 0110 <
1!
any ex.empI.iI_ – and 1' Section l.v0("22A)._o:E_lhe V
Learned Counsel for the
law as have been lbrmulated in been answered
by the Divisiefi Befieh ef ii:0lv's"l'f.-'3e.;l'~Ie.254!9.001 pas._-d
on 4.122006 .Cun;.;hiesib;:ef vs.Mfs.Medieai
Reliel; eenteaded that en. the similar
¢!i:'t_-A.-I.iVe2_'::t.<_'.~',0' afigreale -may al.au&":disposed.
up for hearing before the Bend ~11
– – u l 3 I u n
-‘6. G: date We m%e en’.-umee :1′ agaanst t._.e
‘ ‘girder ~u__I’ passed by the Division Bench of this Court in
‘I*lfA§N0..fiS4_12t)01 decided on 04.12.2005 any order has been
the – inst Appellate Authority 0l’_ not. Today, we have
;’ given to understand that after the re—r'”s’il ”’aeati”::w
‘ fihereinabcsve, the First Appellate Authority has already decided the
‘V _ matter against the assessee and new assessee has preferred further
Yb
IJI
appeal before the Income-Tax Appellate
pending.
4. Leamed Counsel for ‘perfiesA-therefor-e
these matters may alsc be to the Officer
5- the Assessing Clfficer
both the liberty to adduce more evidence in
support their fesji.”;cti’\:fe..»s.’Vccntentions which it would be in a
sun: In.’
L..u..?… ….- … . …..l.. .a……l ……I . .. .’.. ~ ~
l.JuI.!.3s.-=-; }.n.’I*:sI{.: I uu~..uuufii’?nI.ul1u uuu iiplT6’\:iaw. H6 usunuunu
t prayer made by the learned Counsel for the
Fiarlies. A V’ ‘V
\
h view of the aforesaid contentions, these appeals stand
of by giving following directions:
passed by the Ineome–Tax Ainpellate Tribunal are
aside and quashed.
(2) The matters are remitted ijur
de”-iding the mi.-…e: .=.-.£..-.;.., .D.er–.fiI*v.§ng Lpgiertnnity to ‘
both the sides, in seeordanee wi.ti’i’iai{v; id”
(3) It is further’ -::iu1ifie(i”ii’néi’t ‘he Gffieer .,.:.t…
the parties wunld ‘ee.fs.t”Ii.be_rty. te..*’ie§1d fnttiier evidence in respect
of their.iIespeeti.ve ee3nte11tiuns.ii
(4) clarify that since the matter has to
ti,’-..,,£§_?«-…’-.’.§’i…-1.3.-:1 Inenls, the same be done by the Assessing
» ‘«.with{)u’l being influenced b” “f ‘die earlier ‘.’.}l’£..’.::!’.’t–2
. psssedii
.1.
not being decided by us presentiy as the matters stand iemenued.
I”. View ef tue aferesz-.i.., s.;…..zI.n|.iM qnesfiens of law are
TI_1p_t,x:saL The copy of the order be retained in__ file’
appeais.