IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 2" DAY OF MARCH, 2010 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.L.MANJUNATHjHf+ ' AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE E v.NAGAHATHNAg I.T.A.NO.1523/2005".3 BETWEEN: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM_TAx"~ C.R.BUILDING " * '.' 'n QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 2 THE ASST COHMISSIOHER Q? TNOOME TAX cIRcLE.543}%;_ = 4--* c R HOILHiHE_H 4 _ ,_ . QUEENSAROAD,'BRfiGAEORE" '' " '.'.< *.*« APPELLANTS (By Sri K v.ARAVINb, COHNSEL FOR SRI. M v SESHACHALA, FOR AEPEAEANT) 1 M/SWHAJEE=iiFFER SHARIFF NO 92fi95,}RICHMOND ROAD 1Vmmwmmm " - " RESPONDENT
(By Srié A SHANKAR 5 M LAVA, COUNSEL FOR
A”E;aESpONDENT)
“*, This I;T.A. filed u/S.260aA of I.T.Act,
arising out Of Order dated 30—09—2004
Hjaassed in ITA NO.600/Bang/1999 for the
Assessment Year 1994~–95, praying that this
HOn’ble Court may be pleased to: 9?”!
.4
i. formulate the substantial questions of law
stated therein,
ii. allow the appeal and set aside the orders
passed by the ITAT, Bangalore in ITA
No.600/Bang/1999 dated 30—o9–2o04 5; confi,r’x”n.
the order by the Appellate Commissionér”l
confirming the order passed by the §Asstg}b_2
Commissioner of Income Tax Circle~5{3}f&i””
Bangalore and etc.
THIS APPEAL COMING cna Eon, HEA3iRs»°Ts1s}_j
DAY, NAGARATHNA J, DELIVERED Tag FOLLOWING; “”
mmmfiwfzpi ii’
The Substantial: guestions *of lawn raised
in this appeal by the reVenhe§dr% similar to
the Substantial =questions. oi} law- which. have
been answered against the revenue by us today
in ITA Nd i521/2035.”. ~”
2 _acceiding1y} this appeal is dismissed
C as. thi§7 appeal Wis also between the same
fiattaesafv
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
IUDGE