THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MR U K MONU

PDF · subscribers
ITA/297/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01020680200716 October 2012Bench: B.V.PINTO,K.SREEDHAR RAO2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal is not maintainable due to the monetary limit being less than Rs.10,00,000/-, as per its own decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Ranka, 72 DTR 270. However, acknowledging that the Ranka & Ranka decision is challenged before the Supreme Court in S.L.P.No.27468/2012, the Court permitted the revenue to file an application for revival of this appeal if they succeed before the Supreme Court. Until then, the appeal is disposed of as closed. No decision on the merits of the case was made.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Mangalore, are the appellants. The respondent is Mr. U.K. Monu, Proprietor of M/s. U.K. Monu Timbers. The appeal is filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated September 28, 2006, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore, in IT(SS)A.No.161/Bang/2004. This order pertains to the Block Assessment Period from April 1, 1988, to December 2, 1998. The appellants seek to set aside the ITAT's order and confirm the Assessing Officer's order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is maintainable before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, given the monetary limit for appeals. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the assessee's side. The respondent's advocate was absent. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's contention is implicitly that the appeal is maintainable and should be allowed, seeking to set aside the ITAT's order. The revenue relies on the High Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Ranka, 72 DTR 270, which established a monetary limit for such appeals. However, the revenue also notes that this decision is under challenge before the Supreme Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.V.PINTO

I.T.A. No.297 OF 2007

BETWEEN:-

1.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore.

2.

The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Circle-1(1), Mangalore. Appellants (By Sri K.V. Aravind, Advocate)

AND:-

Mr. U.K. Monu, Proprietor, M/s.U.K.Monu Timbers, University Road, Derlakatte, Mangalore. Respondent (By Sri P.A.Bhat, Advocate - absent)

This I.T.A. is filed U/s.260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 28.09.2006 passed in IT(SS)A.No.161/Bang/2004 for the Block Assessment Period 01-04-88 to 02-12-98, praying that this Hon’ble Court may

2 be pleased to (i) formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein and (ii) allow the appeal and set-aside the order of the ITAT, Bangalore in IT(SS)A No.161/Bang/2004 dated 28.09.2006 (Annexure-A) and confirm the order passed by the Assessing Officer, in the interest of justice and equity.

This appeal is coming on for final hearing this day, SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

In view of the decision of this Court in the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Ranka, 72 DTR 270, the appeal is not maintainable because of the monetary limit being less than Rs.10,00,000/-. However, the said decision is challenged before the Supreme Court in S.L.P.No.27468/2012. If the Revenue succeeds, the revenue is permitted to file an application for revival of this appeal, till then the appeal is disposed of as closed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE NM*

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 →