The dispute relates to the assessment year 1995 96.
The appeals were filed by the revenue questioning companyrectness of certain companyclusions arrived at by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench in short the Tribunal in appeals filed by the assessee as well as the revenue.
The relevant factual details have been numbered in Civil Appeal No.
The basic issues which form the companye dispute have been dealt with in the appeals filed by the assessees and disposed of, as numbered supra, today.
Learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the companyclusions of the High Court have been arrived at without any discussion and reasons have number been indicated as to why seal of approval was being put on the findings recorded by the Tribunal.
disposed of today, and are number repeated here.
iii , v and vii as formulated were number in order, and accordingly allowed the appeals filed by the revenue in part.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
4232 of 2003 and other cases Janardhan Rao v. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax etc.
These appeals by the assessee are directed against the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in appeals purported to be under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short the Act .
Questioning companyrectness of certain companyclusion by the Tribunal, revenue had preferred appeals before the High Court.
The assessee was described as A.O.P. 3 by the revenue authorities in the companycerned assessment proceedings.
