IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGAL(§;RE-..V
DATED THIS THE" 24TH DAY OF NDVEMEEE; '25of'09_f' T.
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUsT1C'E"i{;L.AMA.NJU:'N,'z=g'f1":1
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICEAE;av1ND":_;DrȢAR" " .
ITA
BETWEEN A M %
1. The Commissioner of-I1ic0m'eV--ta.2i;--
C.R.Bui1ding., Que?-1'18 .R;0ad,_"»__ "
Banga1or¢v."'A.._ E
2. The Assistiajpt C'nmfi1i'SsiOner"'of Inc0me--taX,
C1r,c1e~6('1~}., C'iR.~Bu11d1ng,«
Queens Rafa (1, 'Ba11gEa«1Qre. .*
" A " Appellants:
[By Sri. V'PL{~.§ /.z~":ra'1v_iIA1'c1,"'Advocate for Sri.M.V.Seshacha1a,
Stgipding Coungevl ] '
mo.-Ta Tsiimzun Road.
BangaJc:gre--52.
A AA{Bjr'~«Sri.SParthasarathi, Advocate)
Vasanfghav N agar,
Respondent
(‘V
This Appeal is filed under Section 260A
Tax Act, 1961 to allow the appeal and
order passed by the ITAT, Bangaiore’ in *
No.3268/Bang/2004, dated 8–9–2006 9.1111. __¢’on’firrnp the ” 2
order passed by the .Appellate” “C.on1n1issdicner’«and,
confirming the order passed by ‘the,-Asst.’eeCornmi’ssiori:e_1*
of Income T ax, Circ1e–6[ 1), Bangaio_re.__
This appeal coming “en”‘~r.for i1e_aan_”g, day, V
MANJUNATH J, delivered thefollvowingz ‘
The Revenue appeal being
aggrieved b}’§”th93§’I’Td€f_’Ptiésefi’V’-i?}”‘tt1:emiii’AT, Bangalore in
ITA No.i3258i/’Bang/f2Qe4,«aavbframing the following
substantial iiaw; ‘t
_ the Tribunal was correct in
hoiding that the notional Value of the
propertymheid by the assessee in respect of
. »v4’t}t1,e”j_un–1et portion should be computed on
A ‘the municipal valuation at Rs.2.25/– per sq.
as against Rs.12/– per sq. ft. adopted by
the assessing officer based on the actual rent
received by the assessing officer based on
6/
the actual rent received by the as:~sess’e.e”‘.in
respect of the other portion of the
:2. W’hether the””I’i*ibuna1_:v.iiiras ll¢o;s:~e¢i it
holding that the assessee
to vacanc alloW’a._nce thunder Se'(:’t’i0.n 24 (E).
{ix} of the Act despite the’-assessee having
not let o1i’t…_the.wee’nti-re Vacant portion of the
building during entiieyear?
2. In rnatter lint l\io.506/2004 we
have set. .._tii.e the authorities and
remanded’. Assessing Officer for fresh
consideration.. ViE~’.inc.e” questions of law in this appeal
are to ‘tl1’e..,rs3u’bstantial question of Law raised in
in respect of the same building, which
ioeen allowed, the present appeal is also
al1oWerl’1- and all the orders passed by the Assessing
CIT (A) and Income Tax Appellate Tribunal are
<3/'
hereby set aside. The matter is remanded"~.sfi0_:"£he
Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in"
the observations made by us
4:2. {'3
% " ff
;sdss
'juéqs
sbb/' ssss