These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against 3 orders of the CIT(A), all dated 25.10.2018. The relevant assessment years are 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.
ITA No.3317/Bang/2018: Asst.Year 2013-2014 ITA No.3318/Bang/2018: Asst.Year 2014-2015 ITA No.3319/Bang/2018: Asst.Year 2015-2016
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE
Before Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K, JM
ITA No.3317/Bang/2018: Asst.Year 2013-2014
ITA No.3318/Bang/2018: Asst.Year 2014-2015
ITA No.3319/Bang/2018: Asst.Year 2015-2016
M/s.Gogga Gurusanthaiah and
Brothers, Mine Owners, P.B.No.4,
Nehru Co-operative Colony
Hosapete – 583 201.
PAN : AACFG6895M.
The Asst.Commissioner of
Income-tax, Circle – 1
Bellary – 583 103.
Appellant by : Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, Advocate
Respondent by :Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Date of Hearing : 27.07.2021
Pronouncement : 28.07.2021
O R D E R
These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against 3 orders of the CIT(A), all dated 25.10.2018.
The relevant assessment years are 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.
2.Some common issues are raised in these appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this
consolidated order. The details of the issue arising in each of the assessment years, the relevant grounds, etc.
3.The assessee is into the business of mining. All the area minted by the assessee was categorized as per the Central
Empowering Committee (CEC) / order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B Category. As per the Supreme Court order, all the mining activities in the State of Karnataka was stopped vide judgment dated 29.07.2011 in WP No.562 of 2009 dated 29.07.2011. Later CEC was constituted under the direction and supervision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which took control of mining, processing, production and sale of iron ore.
4. The above issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the
case of M/s.Veerabhadrappa Sangappa & Co. (supra).
5. The Assessing Officer had added a sum of Rs.4,49,334 for the reason that there is a difference in receipt / sales account in the books of account and receipts as per Form No.26AS.
6.The assessee had paid an amount of Rs.10,00,000 as contribution towards Humpi Utsav to the Deputy Commissioner, Government of Karnataka. This issue we noticed is covered in favour of the assessee in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2009-2010 in ITA No.504/Bang/ 2014 (order dated 29.05.2020), wherein it was held that the contribution made towards Hampi Utsav is an allowable expenditure u/s 37(1) of the I.T.Act.7.
7. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above.
Order pronounced on this 28th day of July, 2021.
Please find attached the enclosed file for the full judgement.