THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MARUTHI BUILDTECH PVT.LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/788/2009HC KarnatakaKAHC01080574200905 November 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,BELLUNKE A.S2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, based on the joint submission of both learned counsels for the appellant and the respondent, dismissed the appeal. The reason for dismissal was that the appeal had become infructuous. No findings were made on the merits of the case, and no substantive questions of law were decided. The operative direction was solely to dismiss the appeal as infructuous, without any further relief or direction to either party.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income-Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appellants) filed an Income Tax Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Karnataka. The appeal challenged an order dated 30.06.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru, in IT(SS)A No.53/BNG/2007. This ITAT order had confirmed an order of the Appellate Commissioner, which in turn had confirmed an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment pertained to the Block Assessment Period from 1/4/1990 to 27/7/2000. The respondent is M/s. Maruthi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.

What were the issues?

The appeal was filed to formulate substantial questions of law and to set aside the ITAT's order. The parties, through their learned counsels, jointly submitted that the appeal be dismissed as having become infructuous. No specific questions of law were formulated or debated in the judgment, nor were there arguments presented by either the assessee or the revenue regarding the merits of the case. The core issue was the procedural disposition of the appeal based on the joint submission of the parties.

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 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

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

ITA NO. 788 OF 2009

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

C.R.BUILDING

QUEENS ROAD

BENGALURU

2.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE – 1(4) C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU

… APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. JEEVAN J.NEERALGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S. MARUTHI BUILDTECH PVT. LTD., NO.26, REST HOUSE ROAD BENGALURU …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. A.SHANKAR AND SRI. M.LAVA, ADVOCATES)

This Income Tax Appeal is filed under Section 260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 30.06.2009 passed in IT(SS)A no.53/BNG/2007, for the Block Assessment Period 1/4/1990 to 27/7/2000 praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to: i. formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein, ii. allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT Bengaluru in IT(SS)A No.53/BNG/2007, dated 30-06-2009, confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru in the interest of justice and equity and etc.

*****

This Income Tax Appeal coming on for Hearing, this day, RAVI MALIMATH J., delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Both learned counsels submit that the appeal be dismissed as having become infructuous.

2.

In view of the same, the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.

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 →