COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. V.S. LAD & SONS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/629/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01048437201324 October 2019Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, comprising Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Ashok S. Kinagi, considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue). The appellant's counsel submitted that the appeal was not maintainable in view of the monetary limits prescribed by Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Director (ITJ), Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi. In light of this submission, the Court found the appeal to be not maintainable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as such, without delving into the merits of the ITAT's order or the substantive issues of the assessment year 2004-2005. No specific finding was made on the substantive tax dispute.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bengaluru, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated July 12, 2013, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'C' Bench, Bengaluru, in ITA No. 561/Bang/2012. The appeal pertained to the assessment year 2004-2005 and challenged the ITAT's decision in favor of the assessee, M/s. V.S. Lad and Sons. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. The procedural history indicates that the ITAT had passed an order which the revenue sought to set aside.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is maintainable before the High Court in light of the monetary limits prescribed by Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Director (ITJ), Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi. The appellant (Revenue) contended that the appeal is not maintainable due to the monetary limits stipulated in the aforementioned circular. The appellant's counsel made a submission to this effect. The respondent (Assessee) did not appear to have made any specific arguments recorded in this excerpt, as the appeal was dismissed based on the appellant's submission.

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 AT BENGALURU

ON THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.629 OF 2013

BETWEEN:

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001. ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND: M/S. V.S. LAD AND SONS PRASHANT NIVAS KRISHNA NAGAR SANDUR-583 119 BELLARY DISTRICT KARNATAKA. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI M. LAVA, ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 12.07.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.561/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-2005, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON’BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND

2 SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 12.07.2013 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, BENGALURU IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. ITA NO.561/BANG/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-2005 AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL.

*****

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellant submit that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the monetary limits in terms of Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, 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 →