PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S CITY HOSPITAL CHARITABLE TRUST

PDF · subscribers
ITA/253/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01051064201809 November 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,BELLUNKE A.S2 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 submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants (Revenue) regarding the monetary limits and the applicability of Circular No. 3 of 2018. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as such. The Court did not delve into the merits of the ITAT's order dated September 22, 2017. No specific ratio decidendi for future cases is evident, as the dismissal was procedural.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income-Tax Officer (Exemptions), Mangaluru (the Revenue) against an order dated September 22, 2017, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2014-15 and challenges the ITAT's decision in ITA No. 2206/Bang/2016. The Revenue's counsel submitted that the appeal was not maintainable due to monetary limits and in terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue was maintainable. The Revenue contended that the appeal was not maintainable due to the monetary limits prescribed for filing appeals and in accordance with Circular No. 3 of 2018, dated July 11, 2018, issued by the Director (ITJ), Central Board of Direct Taxes. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent (M/s. City Hospital Charitable Trust).

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

ON THE 09TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BELLUNKE

I.T.A. NO.253 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(E), MANGALURU.

2.

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER

(EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, MANGALURU.

… APPELLANTS

(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S.CITY HOSPITAL CHARITABLE TRUST, POUND GARDEN, NANDAVAN VYASA RAO LANE, KADRI, MANGALURU, …RESPONDENT

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 22.09.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO.2206/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THIS COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE

APPELLATE ORDER DATED 22.09.2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENGALURU IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO.ITA NO.2206/BANG/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

*****

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the monetary limits and also in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 passed by Director (ITJ), Central Board Direct Taxes, New Delhi. 2. In view of the submission made, the appeal is dismissed as such.

Sd/- Sd/-

JUDGE JUDGE

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 →