High Court Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs K L Swamy (Huf) on 9 March, 2010

Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs K L Swamy (Huf) on 9 March, 2010
Author: K.L.Manjunath & B.V.Nagarathna
 

, AND:

IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 9"'DAy or MARCH, 20;H_@_

PRESENT V. '
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.L.'MAH;EHATHA
AND ,; -. . . ...
THE HON'BLE MRS. JssTTcElEEv. NAsAEATHEAlV
I.T.A.Noqé8é§/godfikgiaf E
BETWEEN: 3' lmx ' K

1. The Commissloner_ofVIneofie$Tak;;°
Central CiEcle,:C.R[Bulldipg;1\

Queens Road;uBanga3oEe,', ' "*

2. The Defiutylfiomfiissioaerfofl
Income+TaE,"Gentral Cirole~l(l),
C.R;BuildingJRQueens Road,
Bangalore."flAa_W_"_ .. APPELLANTS

(By Aavocate Sri;¥ V Seshachala)

':uE;LlswAmywfHUF),

eNo,9;%seshad;1 Road,
Bangalore} 2 .. RESPONDENT

(By Adsocate M/s K.R.?rasad)

lzfois ITA is filed under Seo.26OA of the Income

e,_ TlTa3EAct,l96l to allow the appeal and set aside the
“~_ lorders passed by the Income Tax Appellate

fig»

.«assessee ‘and “in_ favour of the revenue under a

“similar. set_ of facts and circumstances similar

A refienue and. against the assessee. Therefore he

that following the reasons given in ITA

income representing’ before the assessing
officer, preparation of replies before
ITO, preparation of appeal, representing
before the appellate authorities and
income tax appellate tribunal,” would
amount to an allowable expenditure} under
Sec.57(iii) of the Act which, contemplates
that such an expenditure is allowable cnly
if it has been incurred for earnihg*the,
income from other sources? a’ h ” *

4. Whether the appellatef*authorities;’have.
recorded a finding that_ the; income* has
been derived “from business jmand} the
expenditure incurred is ‘wan xjallowable
deduction, without basing its finding on
any cogent7_ evidencefrfi butL”” on mere
conjectures”aandf surmisesg and therefore
recorded a perverse finding?;

2. When the “matter gwas’rtakenWgup for hearing,

counsel for the parties submit that the questions

raised in ,this .appeal are answered against the

questions hofiflawr were raised. in ETA. 18/2005 all

the questions of law are answered in favour of the

No.18/2005, these questions are answered in favour

of the revenue and against the assessee.

3. Accordingly, the appeal is allQ§ed»:asdeEtheu

order of assessment is restored _ i

FUBGE

y””-._ “Rfiéo31o