High Court Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., on 22 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., on 22 October, 2008
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao C.R.Kumaraswamy
I

IN "me HIGH cauqar or KARNATAKA AT BANGALGRE
DATED THIS THE 22"" DAY or OCTOBER zoom
?RESENT  "S O '

we Ho~'Ba.E MRJUSTICE K.SREEDHAR'v:¥i¥8O:.A..:" S O 1'

AND

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE 

INCOME TAX APPEA£S._V'NQ.2821'-OF 2oéS 8O   

EEEELL:

1 THE commsszomea or-'~ DHCOME TAX  j  O 'S 
CRBUILDING     
QUEENS RoAD__ ,  '
BANGALORE  

2 TH§3INCOME5TAX cjrvzcaa'-(ms) 
wARD~--1_5.{3)*fj     . .
c R B_UILDIN*3S; ~.V"UEEN4S'R_O;f--'.D
BANGAi..ORE v *  " ...APPEi,.LANTS

(8_Y_SRI:OtM \.{'sEsI'--;aACH.eL:;;i,' ADVOCATE)

        
"fr:-«:5: NEW INDIA' «A§s;~URANcE COMPANY LIMITED

D.Q'.'§<¢o.'¢, §<UKRE3A_HOUSE

KUMAM 9A'Rx'_~RoA{) *

BANGALORE. . =.1__  ...RESPONDENT

(BY SR1! M V 3AVALI, ADVOCATE)

O ” ISTHISHOINCOME TAX AP?EAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION ‘Z6041 OF

‘ i.T’.ACT_.””. 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11.20.2006 AND

V .CORRIE–ENE}UM DATED 20.11.2096 PASSED XN ITA NOJ503/BANG/2005

” “f'{f)R;THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002~2003, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE

* SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND TO ALLOW

‘ ‘ ” THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX
” __ ‘.’fi’tPPELL.ATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN XTA NO.1503/BANG/2005, DATED

4 11.19.2906 AND CCJRRIGENDUM DATED 2£1.11.2G05 AND CQNRRM THE

ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISEEONER, CONFIRMING THE ORDER
PASSED arr ‘n-cc INCOME TAX OFFICER (ms), WARE? 15(3), !.’5ANGALUKi1’.

THIS ENCOME TAX APPEAL COMING om FOR oeoees .1%H:S44..:)edy,

K. SREEDHAR RAO, 3., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Llflfie

Sri.M.V.Javaii takes notice for the ‘reepdndeet:g’ _

I.A.nos.1 and 2/zoos are egpowédf TbeeV’§tdd1:,ctid3n aft

certified copy of the common o_r__d’er:1;:a_esed’taiyivlthexfiincome.
Tax Appeflate Tribtzina’I,’A._L ;’B§éI’n’ge:l’or_e, in ITA
no.1503/Bang/200.5 datedv:’_jg1.’i«Qd~2056 Corrigendum
dated 2o.11.2%os:is tijstdssptdensed v_v:itlj1V,”‘.’Tl’*1ta”de.-lay of 283 days
in fiiing thte’tAp颧| s1:’:ciof1’ed.A

The eutjatstaststiail “dueeti.dhV.’of law involved in this appeak

_is no_sj1er’e ree-‘int_eg’ra tend the same has been decided in

‘revenue in I.T.A.no.2-45/2008 and other batch

_case,”‘t–hlsv–.ApptéeE is disposed of.

ef’ of the judgment rendered in the said

Sd
Iud§3

Sd/
Judge

[(3