THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CELSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/320/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01029863201631 July 2017Bench: K.S.MUDAGAL,H.G.RAMESH2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the appeal. The Court noted that the learned counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that the question raised in the present appeal had been answered against the appellants by this Court in the case of CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 98 (Karn). Based on this submission and the precedent set by the earlier judgment, the Court found no reason to interfere with the ITAT's order. The ratio decidendi is that if a legal issue has been conclusively decided by the High Court, subsequent appeals raising the same issue are likely to be dismissed following the precedent.

What were the facts?

The appellants, the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Karnataka. The appeal challenges an order dated 16.10.2015 passed in ITA No.1346/BANG/2014 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore Bench. The assessment year in question is 2007-2008. The respondent is M/s. Celstream Technologies Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was filed seeking formulation of a substantial question of law and to set aside the ITAT's order.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the order passed by the ITAT for the assessment year 2007-2008 was sustainable in law. The appellants sought to formulate a substantial question of law to challenge the ITAT's decision. The appellants' contention, as presented through their counsel, was that the question raised in the appeal had already been decided against them by the High Court in a previous case. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent (assessee).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.320/2016

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2017

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.320/2016

BETWEEN :

1.

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

CIT (A), 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA

BANGALORE-560 095

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-11(2)

2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA

BANGALORE-560 095

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI ARAVIND K.V. ADVOCATE)

AND :

M/S. CELSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. NO.29A, 2ND CROSS, PHASE-I ELECTRONIC CITY BANGALORE-560 100

...RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED:16.10.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.1346/BANG/2014, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, H.G.RAMESH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ITA No.320/2016

-2-

JUDGMENT

H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):

Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submits that the question raised in this appeal is answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 98 (Karn). The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

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 →