THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS MEENA S PATIL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/796/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01048343200719 December 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,K.NATARAJAN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants, held that the appeal is not maintainable. The submission was based on two grounds: the monetary limits for filing appeals and the applicability of Circular No.3 of 2018. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as such, without delving into the merits of the case or the ITAT's order. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal. No issues were expressly left undecided, as the appeal was disposed of on a preliminary ground.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru Bench, in ITA No.244/BANG/2006 dated March 29, 2007. The appellants sought to set aside the ITAT's order and confirm the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent is Mrs. Meena S. Patil. The appeal was listed for orders before the High Court of Karnataka.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is maintainable in view of the monetary limits prescribed for filing appeals by the revenue. (Question of law) 2. Whether the appeal is maintainable in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 11-7-2018, passed by the Director (ITJ), Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi. (Question of law) The appellants argued that the appeal is not maintainable due to the monetary limits and in terms of the aforementioned circular. No arguments were recorded for the respondent.

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 AT BENGALURU

ON THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.796 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU.

2.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),

CIRCLE–19(1),

BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

MRS. MEENA S.PATIL

265, CHANDRA GIRI,

17TH CROSS,

SADASHIVNAGAR,

BENGALURU.

... RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH, IN

I.T.A. NO.244/BANG/2006 DATED 29-3-2007 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE–19(1), BENGALURU.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T

The learned counsel for the appellants submits that this appeal is not maintainable in view of the monetary limits and also in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 11-7-2018, passed by the Director (ITJ), Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi.

In view of the submission made, the appeal is dismissed as such.

SD/-

SD/- JUDGE

JUDGE kvk

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →