COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MANGALORE URBAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA/110/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01021791201624 October 2017Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the question of law raised in the present appeal was already decided against the appellant (Revenue) by the same Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, decided on 07.11.2014. Therefore, following the precedent, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The ratio decidendi is that if a legal issue has been conclusively decided by a higher court, subsequent appeals on the same issue by the same party will be dismissed based on that precedent. No specific relief was granted or denied on merits as the appeal was dismissed based on the established legal position.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mangalore, against an order dated 15.05.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru Bench 'A'. The appeal is filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee is M/s. Mangalore Urban Development Authority. The High Court condoned a delay of 119 days in filing the appeal. The appellant's counsel submitted that the question raised in the appeal has been answered against the appellant by the same High Court in a previous case.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the question of law raised in the appeal is decided against the appellant by this Court? The appellant (Revenue) argued that the question raised in this appeal has been answered against them by the High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board [ITA No.261/2013 (DD 07.11.2014)]. The respondent (Assessee) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment provided, but the appeal was dismissed based on the appellant's submission regarding the precedent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.110/2016

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.110/2016

BETWEEN :

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) MANGALORE

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND :

M/S. MANGALORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY URVA STORES ASHOKNAGAR MANGALORE – 570 006

...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI S.PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 15.05.2014 IN ITA NO.170/BANG/2013 PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU BENCH ‘A’, BENGALURU.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ITA No.110/2016

-2-

JUDGMENT

Ag.CJ (Oral):

1.

Heard. In the interest of justice, delay of 119 days in filing the appeal is condoned. I.A.No.1/2016 is allowed accordingly.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant fairly submits that the question raised in this appeal is answered against the appellant by this Court in Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board [ITA No.261/2013 (DD 07.11.2014)]. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

hkh.

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 →