The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Bharath Beedi Works Ltd on 2 April, 2008

11! THE HIGH COURT 0!? KARNATAKA AT BANGRLORE
DATED 1'1-us THE 2'!' DAY or APRI3l&,g'.:_3:i'4E:JV:()t8fl''~V:. » VA
PRESENT  A  

THE H01\I'BL1n MR. JUsTIéE'nn;£:rA§fi fF+:i1y1;§«'  

 

BETWEEN:

1.

The Con1131:i’s:ziong:*i;’6f’ * é
‘ ,
. ‘
Attavma;__ . _
MANGALOQ 1. ‘

2. The’. Asst; L”2taJ;1i31i§&jf5n.ei’ of
I11con1eTax,”._f ._” ”

Cixélc 4 2(1),

% MANGALDRE. .. APPELLANT8.

Adv.)

}3.t:sti’i Works Ltd.,

({l”x1…_.._.4.l. r)’.;…@..1..»
.|Dsl.l=Ll’£.’.i.l=3..I.’ ,

Kadri Read,

‘” ‘FE — 5’75 GCI3. .. ITtISI§P(T)flTJF}iI’ ‘.

w_*_*_*_*_*_*

This I.’I’.A. filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act.
1951 arising out of order dated 08.06.2007 Wpsssett in TTA
No.1205fBANG-{£2005 for the assessment to

allow the a pea] and set aside the o1’d_er_ of. I_11o3o:i:nc

J.

Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, i11:’I’I’A’N.o’. dated,
08.06.2007 and confirm the order;”pas$ed’tVb3?’the ‘A

‘l’ ‘ifl I ‘l’ A nn1r’r1-inn’ (“I11 nr (1-nr~Ia=t’1″sa “.fh-in “Hair nlhfinnh
I II ‘ I’ I0 V” J.’ ” \n”C-.:’f.n I-A-IA’ . W”

Verma .I., delivered the

Sri. I{u1:har=: foi” t’l1e_. Vappellant. Memo has been filed
1:7-if cs ‘:’.”|’I”Q1J;”i”V V. : Ia’.w fliurniaenfl an nnt nrtaac.-.Pr1

_ 2___ ‘__’t_, {L _. _V ‘ 1’. _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ __1 __ __ _ n

jpem i:;1’iiis1.ui3:st:u ‘ ‘ Oi pifissed. Ni