The Commr Of Income Tax vs K V Chinnaiah on 25 February, 2010

E
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 23" DAY or FEBRUARY, 2010
PRESENT

THE HON'BLE M. JUSTICE K.L. MANJUNATfi;T

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGEEATHEAR=w"

I.T.A.No.2813/20C5fil
BETWEEN:

1. The Commissioner of Ihcome--Tax, V
No.55/1, Shilpashree, '= "
Vidyaranya Complex, Em
Vishveshwaranagar,"_'

Mysore. E

2. The Depfity_CoEmiss§oner of
Income~TaxfoCircler2(1),
No.5Sf1; sh;1pash;ée;
Vidyafanya Complex}
Vishveshwaranagarfi

Mysore. APPELLANTS

_V»t*($yEAdvobate Sri.M.V.Seshachala)
ARDLE '_Ea" r C
K{VyChinEaiah, PWD Contractor,
No.19ly D Block, J.P.Nagar,

E'.,'¢Mysore,1 .. RES?ONDENT

vx«VEtx_(Ey Advocate Sri.A.Shankar)

This ITA is filed under Sec 260A of the Income

VEV, fax Act,l961 to allow the appeal and set aside the

5%,.

 



'1

orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Bangalore, in ITA No 827/Bang/2004 dated
8.3.2005 confirming the order passed by the Deputy
Commissioner of Income~Tax, Circle--2(l), Mysore.

This Appeal is coming on for final shearing
this day, MANJUNATH J. delivered the followingfa

J U D G M E N T

Appeal filed by the irevenuehfli$i!iTs}VNoi§d
2801/2005 is dismissed by this ssusg; iissssss;s,
counsel for both the Partiéfibre§u&S?d§hédbodrt to
dismiss this aPPea} §©il§wi99 hitheiidaforesaid
judgment since the qnesticns sf lag framed in this
appeal are ansfiered: in ptfiej shoved appeal between

the same partiesii

2. Accordinglypflpxfihisdi appeal is dismissed

answering the qpestions of law framed against the

agrevenfie and in favour of the assessee.

s”-,p”R/080310

Sd/*
JUDGE

Sd/~
JUDGE