The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs National Insurance Co Ltd on 22 October, 2008

1

IN THE HIGH coum or: KARNATAKA AT aA~eALo.r;fE20
DATED THIS THE 22"" DAY or ocrroasa 2¢%.f>%¢*sT['VAT 

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR.32JsT1cE K.SREEDHAPT..uRAC:)T[::  0;"

AND

THE HON'B§.E MRJUSTICE c.§<,kKL*TMAaAswATm? 

mcama TAX APPEA£.LNQ.354′ o_r-290003

;

THE COMMISSlbi=éER 7 ~

C R BUILDWG ‘ _
QUEENSRCEAD f _ ‘
BANGAL£'”)RE_f’> _ ‘ ‘

THE ‘iN€OMiET- TAX’¥§3FFi’CER. {TBS} A ”
WARD-16(2}’V.. , —

C R’:._Bun_£:-ms,’V<.:yuAEErs;s'A~s;0AD' '
BANGALORE –

(BY syn} %vvsAEsHAc.V+£ALA’, ADVOCATE)

,AL\l_Q; ..

0′ NATTQAIAL SASSLTTIANCE COMPANY LIMITED
‘DIVESIGNALTOFFECE «-2

‘SAT?-E1′ comsaagx
N0;54;–LALBAG’H. RQAD

V BANGA§__ORE~ 55,0′ 027

(B’z’ 0AFs’.I: M V JAVALI, ADVOCATE)

. . .APPELi..ANTS

…RESPCJNDENT

00 VTTTHIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260~A OF

T fI;T.Ar.:r,,-‘x951, ARISENG OUT 0? ORQER DATED 28.09.2006 pzxssee ms
._’_§TA– NQ1548/BANGIZGGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2032-2903,

PRATING TC) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW

,_’ “STATED THEREIN AND TO ALLOW THE APPEAL ANE SET ASIDE THE
‘ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE
0’ “IN ITA NO.1S48/BANG/2005, DATES 28.09.2006 AND CONFIRM THE
ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMTSSIONER, CONFIRMING THE ORDER

PASSED av THE INCOME TAx OFFICER (TBS), WARD 15(2), BANGALORE.

2
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THiEZ._ DAY,

K. snmmnn mo, 3., ereuveaso THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGHE!’lT

Sri.M.V.Javali takes notice for the respo.ndoen’t, V

I.A.nos.1 and 2/2098 are allg5\l¢”ed;.1_’n.e pro’d:lz:l::lo.nV of V

certified copy of the common ordefA:’pa:ss_ed

Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘Q”=.Ban§ai.ore.«.l ITA” V

no . 1 548/Bang! datiedfl dispensed with.

The delay of is condoned.

involved in this appeal

is no more” same has been decided in

favourof the””reyen_uleAin_: .A.no.245/2008 and other batch

“of In tern1svv—-e–f«’the judgment renderw in the said

th.isv–1§ooe:§:l ‘is; disposed of.

35/3’
Iudjfil

Sdf§_
Tudge