THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MUBARAK HUSSAIN MOTIN

ITA/5005/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC02008426201318 September 2013Bench: K.L.MANJUNATH,A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Court noted that the substantial question of law arising in this appeal had been considered by the Court on the same day in I.T.A. No.5018/2012. In that related case, the Court had held that any payment made to the Government is to be treated as legal tender and cannot be deleted when computing income. Consequently, the High Court found no substantial question of law in the present appeal and confirmed the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, comprising the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer, has filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated December 29, 2011, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench ‘B’. The Tribunal had allowed an appeal filed by the assessee, Sri Mubarak Husain Motin. The appeal is before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, for admission. The Revenue is the appellant, and the assessee is the respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether any substantial question of law arises in this appeal, concerning the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowing the assessee's appeal. Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that a substantial question of law, identical to one considered by this Court on the same day in I.T.A. No.5018/2012, arises. The precedent established in that case held that any payment made to the Government is treated as legal tender and cannot be deleted while computing income. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the Revenue. However, the filing of the appeal indicates disagreement with the Tribunal's order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. L. MANJUNATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA I.T.A. No.5005/2013 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, C.R. Building, Navanagar, Hubli. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Hubli. - Appellants (by Sri Y.V. Raviraj, Advocate) AND: Sri Mubarak Husain Motin, M/s National Steels Contractor Plot, Gokul Road, Hubli. - Respondent (by Sri Sangram S. Kulkarni, Advocate) This appeal is filed u/S 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order passed in ITA No.498/BANG/2012 dated 29.12.2011 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench ‘B’ allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. This appeal coming for admission on this day, K.L.MANJUNATH, J, delivered the following:-

: 2 : JUDGMENT Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submits that the substantial question of law arise in this appeal has been considered by this Court today in I.T.A. No.5018/2012 wherein this Court has held that any payment made to the Government shall be treated as a legal tender and the said payment cannot be deleted while computing the income. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the Income Tax Appellate Authority holding that no substantial question of law arises in this appeal. SD/-

JUDGE SD/-

JUDGE bvv

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →