PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, vs. M/S OBOPAY MOBILE TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/1029/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01051816201701 September 2021Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for the appellants had filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The reason for withdrawal was that the tax effect, amounting to Rs.91,77,202/-, was below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No.3/2018, as amended by Circular No.17/2019, dated 08.08.2019. The memo was placed on record. Consequently, the High Court ordered that the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore, against an order dated 28.04.2017 passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Bangalore, in I.T.(T.P).No.238/BANG/2016 for the Assessment Year 2011-2012. The respondent is M/s Obopay Mobile Technology India Pvt. Ltd. The appellants sought to set aside the Tribunal's order and prayed for formulation and decision of substantial questions of law in their favor. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The substantial questions of law were to be formulated by the High Court. The appellants sought to set aside the order of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal. The judgment does not explicitly state the specific questions of law or the arguments made by either the assessee or the revenue. However, the appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, implying that substantial questions of law were in contention. The memo filed by the appellants indicates that the tax effect was Rs.91,77,202/-, which was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No.3/2018 as amended by Circular No.17/2019.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

I.T.A.No.1029/2017

BETWEEN :

1 . PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE-5, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGLAORE BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADV.)

AND :

M/s OBOPAY MOBILE TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD., ENZYME JNC BUSINESS CENTER, 2ND FLOOR, MPK MANSION, NO.18, GUAVA GARDEN, 5TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 095. PAN No.AAACO9704H

…RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 28.04.2017 PASSED IN I.T.(T.P).NO.238/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012, PRAYING THIS

- 2 -

HON'BLE COURT TO I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AS FRAMED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY DECIDING THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW IN FAVOR OF THE APPELLANTS. II. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28.04.2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE IN I.T.(T.P).NO.238/ BANG/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEA 2011-2012.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the appeal since the tax effect being Rs.91,77,202/-, below the threshold tax effect as mentioned in CBDT Circular No.3/2018 as amended by Circular No.17/2019, dated 08.08.2019.

The said memo is placed on record.

The appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE PMR

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →