##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 84 OF 2021 BETWEEN:

1. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 7 BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 5, KOLKATA.

Digitally signed by AASEEFA …APPELLANTS PARVEEN (BY SRI. E. I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

Location: HIGH AND:

COURT OF KARNATAKA M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD., (IN THE MATTER OF SHAW WALLACE FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,)

UB TOWERS NO. 24, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BANGALORE- 560001.

PAN : AAFCS 4451D.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MISTRI JEHANGIR, SR.COUNSEL FOR MISS. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 28/08/2019 PASSED IN ITA NO. 210/KOL/2008, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-2005 PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 28.08.2019 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'B' BENCH, BENGALURU IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. ITA NO. 210/KOL/2008 (ANNEXURE-A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-2005, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

The above appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 28.08.2019 in ITA No.210/KOL/2008 for the assessment year 2004-05 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B'

Bench, Bangalore.

2. The above appeal was admitted for hearing by order dated 27.01.2022 to examine the following two Substantial Questions of Law:

1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the addition in the hands of the assessee made in respect of sale of shares of RITPL on protective basis by holding the shares of RITPL were acquired by the assessee as a strategic holding to have control of the brewery business carried on by Shaw Wallace Breweries Ltd and thus income from the sale of same was taxable as Long Term Capital Gains as against income from business ignoring that even when the conditions for granting benefit of section 54EC are not satisfied and without appreciating that transaction in question was purely a business transaction considering the intention of assessee in making profit alone?

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in allowing deduction of fee of Rs.6,94,29,123/- paid to M/s. Kinsley & Co., claimed by the assessee as deduction towards professional charges simply relying on the fact that the payment was made to M/s. Kinsley & Co., and services were rendered by them while ignoring the findings of the assessing officer as well as the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that no evidence was furnished by the assessee to show that the services were rendered in connection with the transactions of transfer of shares of RITPL?"

3. Heard learned counsel Sri.Sanmathi.E.I for appellants-Revenue and learned Senior Counsel Sri.Mistri Jehangir for learned counsel Ms.Tanmayee Rajkumar for respondent-Assessee.

4. At the outset, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-Assessee points out that the appeal before this Court questioning the order of the ITAT dated 28.08.2019 in ITA No.210/KOL/2008 is not maintainable in view of the fact that the assessment order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Kolkata. Learned Senior Counsel placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. ABC PAPERS LTD reported in [2022] 141 TAXMANN.COM 332 (SC) submits that appeal against the decision of the ITAT would lie before the High C