PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 7 vs. SHRI. LAKSHMIPAT DUDHERIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/223/2020HC KarnatakaKAHC01045473201918 August 2021Bench: S.SUJATHA,SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not maintainable. This decision was based on the fact that the tax effect was less than Rupees One Crore and no permission had been granted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to file the appeal, as stipulated by Circular No. 23 of 2019 dated 6th September 2019. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. However, the court granted liberty to the appellants to file a fresh appeal if they obtain the necessary permission from the CBDT as per the aforementioned circular. No substantive issues were decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore (appellants) against Shri. Laxmipat Dudheria (respondent). The appeal was filed under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The judgment does not specify the assessment year(s) or the order or action under challenge. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history leading to this appeal is not detailed, other than the filing of the appeal itself.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was the maintainability of the appeal. The appellants sought to decide questions of law, but the judgment focuses on a procedural defect. The appellants did not argue any specific grounds on merits. The revenue (appellants) did not present any arguments regarding the substantive issues of the case. The court considered the applicability of Circular No. 23 of 2019 dated 6th September 2019, which likely pertains to monetary limits for filing appeals and the requirement of CBDT permission.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260(A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA.223/2020 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021 PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

I.T.A.No.223/2020 BETWEEN: 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 7

BMTC COMPLEX,

KORAMANGALA,

BANGALORE.

2.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

CIRCLE-7(1)(2),

BMTC COMPLEX,

KORAMANGALA,

BANGALORE. …APPELLANTS

(BY SRI SANMATHI.E.I., ADV.)

AND:

SHRI. LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA, NO.66, NAVNIKETAN, K. R. ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE-560 004.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI K.R.PRADEEP, ADV.)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF

ITA.223/2020 2

LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

In the present appeal, the tax effect is less than rupees One Crore and there is no permission granted by the Central Board Direct Taxes to file an appeal and therefore, in the light of the Circular No.23 of 2019 dated 6th September 2019, this appeal is not at all maintainable.

2.

Therefore, the Appeal is dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the appellants to file fresh appeal in case permission is granted by the Central Board Direct Taxes as per Circular No.23 of 2019 dated 6th September 2019.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

KNM/-

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 →