A V' " ~. _ 'V ._1§3a§:;gél0rc 1 IN THE HEGH COURT OF IKARNATAKA DATED THIS THE 17% DAECOF 0cfOBi«;:;ék%29¢$ & ' 912333??? ' % " THE HON'BL}.'2'. MR.JLfS"£I_CE sRm3.Q}£A.RVVRA;o' % ANDAV L L THE HONBLE KQMARASWAMY INCOME 3004 1.
bf-1.uc:j§mc–tax
(LR; 4Q!,1_§i€_I1._’S Road
2. The: _VA:3sista1it Coinmissionar
g -V of Inco111e”I’ax
~ – 11:
R; . Building, Queens Road
. ..APPELLAN’I’S
A%(13;z isfi: M.v. Shcshachala 85 1<:.v. Arav1'nd,Advs.)
. AJ.'~IIiz)':*= "
A /is. Peutronics Pvt Ltd.
No.335, Rahcja Arcade
” Koramangala, Bangalore
. . .RESPC)NDEN’I’
{By Sri: KR. Prasad, Adv)
{wk
2
This ITA is filed under Section 260A of the
Tax Act, 1961 out of order dated: _..l.(:§/.3f’$0{}s1
passed in mes) A.No. 14/Bang/1993 rm: n;ei’sjes1<;askss}
period 1987438 to 1997-98 (npto 16.12.1995; pzfayixagto
formulate the substantial qt_z_esifa_'_ons; of " -=1'aw* stated '
therein; and to allow the appealand'set"aside__"t.'51e_orders
passed by the Income Tax AppeE1ate"'I';*ibt1fl'9.'.,'BaIigs1ore
in ITA No. 14/Bang/1998 _dt: '16.'3.2OO4–"I.eon'firLa 'me,
order of the Appellate Commissioner and o;fa'1';.£'3r:i1 the '
order passed by the Assista'x1§"Comm:ssiefier:vof Income
Tax, Central CireIe—-II;1,. Barxgajom '
This ITA comirfg for uthis day, the Court
made the following:– f i __
""fJUeGMENT
filed the returns for the
assessmeot Add'-159.3-94 declaring the value of
. like fiofiey, manuals etc., as consumable
ffs.1'?§oWI1 it as a revenue expenditure. The
Authority had accepted the returns and
:the assessment order approving the method of
d submitted in the returns. The intelligence
" ~ conducted the raid of business prmises of the
assessee on 16.12.1996. At the time of raid, the
materials like Floppy, manuals etc., were found in the
4?/~
4
4. The ‘I’ribuna1 has set aside the
Assessing Authority and has found :
shown in the peturns ‘
considered as undisclosod ‘iqoome L.
proceedings undtxr Chapter of Tax Act.
It is not in Atzsoofity has
assessed the on of the above
material The liability to
pay tax. whether the action
could 14(1)} of the Income Tax
and to found in search as
v question in issue.
‘V ..Vy’V_’i;!f;::.’~:”fol1owing substantial questions of law
H V’ _ are consideration:
*1) Whether the Tribunal was
correct in holding that the nonw
disclosure of opening stock and closing
stock which had resulted in discovery
of undisclosed income of
Rs.14,07,000/- cannot be brought to
A’/
gut tlie shown it as consumablm and
but had not disclosed in closing
had followed the said pattern of
, /; ‘eonsistently earlier while submitfing the
6
based on any entry in the bq;3ke..’,pf _
account or other dmugzefie ‘ ‘% T’ V
transactions, Whe1*e””e11A_c.h A
bullion, jewellery, A va§l_£1é’ib1e~ . –~ . . 77 A
thing. entry i1’1’i_:hc;. 0f
other doellzatieiei; or ~. _t1*ax””e”-fiseicfition
represents whoflyD6;’ or A ‘A
property which
not have . f .. for «’ “the
P11I’P0$¢$§*9f (pr expense.
deductiienii. under
this fe”ej_1d tee ram.»
7. It ieneteeixi mute the materials found
in Search the accounts furnished
j”fO:ivt11e assessment years in question.
39/