High Court Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Canbank Financial Services … on 20 August, 2008

Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Canbank Financial Services … on 20 August, 2008
Author: K.L.Manjunath & A.S.Pachhapure
IN THE HEGH COURT 0? KARN§TAKA AT gamg LGRE
BATES THIS THE 28"{E%Y as AUGGST, 2QO8, 

PRESENT:

THE HON'BL€ MR. JUSTICE K.L. MANguHA$§*§* a 

fififi

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTECE A.$L.§A€§E§§U§E%1"X'
INCGME TAX APPEALLN$.é92 fig §§g§7 WW'

BETWEEN:

1. The Commissioner of EncomefTaX,' "
c.R.Bui1d1nq;,_ """~j V;L_ ' 1
Queens Roaa;t.J *  jk* '-% "x J,
Bangalope;» 5° * ' 1- *"

N7

The Joint Cmmmissififieg of Incomemfax

Assefismentr & _' 4',"

Speciai Range&6,< V

C.R.Buil§ing, "

Queefis Road, -5 .

Bafigaiare.  a  V ... APPELLRNTXS

fEy M/§} M,V,SeshaChaia and K.V.Aravind, Advs.}

AN§: 

K 'M/S. Canbank Financiai Services Lt§.,
"",6m Floor, Naveen Csmplex,
». .1§,'M,G. Road,
= Bangalflre-1. .,. RESPONDENTXS

[BQ Sri. Kumar, Sr. Counsel, for M/3. King &

V'””Patr1dge, %fivs.}

%~Ir~!s-‘

This ETA is filad 3/Sec. 2663 of the Incame Tax
Act, 1961, ariging out of Order dated 31.33.2834
passed in C.O. No.4$/Bang/19%? in;V ETR
No.6fi3/Bangf19Q9 for the assessment year. E§?3~§3
praying to formulatg the substantial queSti§§3 aof
law stated therein and to allow the appeal 5nd’3ét

aside the Qrder passed by the Income ?§K £p§ei;$£é*a
Tribunal, Bangaicre, 5.0. No.45/Bangfl§§9* ix E?Au’

No.603fBang/E999 dat@§ 31.e3,2e@4′ ana 4¢cnf:;m; the
Grder passed by the é§pel;3ue j’Commi33:qner
confirming the Grder passedi Vby’ the ‘ JQiH{

Commissioner of Income Tax, ‘As3essmen§sg”SpeCial,

Rangewfi, Bangalore, etc.

Tfiis ETA cominqron far Finak,Hearihg; this day
Manjunath 5., delivered~the fallgwingz

/”””§§pGM£§§

Thié appeal as by the fé?enue, challefigifig the
Grder §as$ed’byg£he1IhQéme Tax appellate Tribanai,

§angai0reiB§hch §A’ §fi3€.O. No.45/Bangf1Q99 in ETA

._Nc.ee${3ang;1é99, gated 31.33.2094.

.2′

_;;v%_A»T§é; Eesponfient is a public sectar

un$e;fakin§£fifT§e appeéiants have not produced any

W_ fiocument is show that fihe consent has been obtained

frgm the Comgetent &ut§Qrity {C.O.B} before filing

1

‘”thi5 agpeai. En tnw absence sf such consent, the

“gapgaai is net maintainabie. Therefore, the present

appaai hag to be éismissed. Accezdingly, thi5

appaal is dismisaed. idberty is granted ta revive

€%//

this appeal, if really such csnsent had been gzanted

by the Competent Authority §C.fi.B].

Ksm*