THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT U LAKSHMI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/828/2008HC KarnatakaKAHC01036978200814 August 2012Bench: B.MANOHAR,K.SREEDHAR RAO2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in its decision, referred to the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Guffic CHEM (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & anr. reported in (2011) 332 ITR 602. Based on this precedent, the High Court held that the questions of law are answered against the revenue. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The specific reasoning or the questions of law that were answered against the revenue are not detailed in the provided judgment excerpt, other than the reliance on the Guffic CHEM case. No operative directions like remand or deletion were issued, as the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Bangalore, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal challenges an order dated March 11, 2008, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore, in ITA No. 832/BANG/2007. The ITAT's order had apparently confirmed the orders of the Appellate Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year in question is 2002-03. The respondent is Smt. U. Lakshmi, the legal representative of T.V. Umesh Gupta.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the substantial questions of law formulated in the appeal should be answered in favour of the revenue. The Revenue contended that the order passed by the ITAT, Bangalore, in ITA No. 832/BANG/2007, dated March 11, 2008, should be set aside, thereby confirming the orders of the Appellate Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The Revenue sought to formulate substantial questions of law for consideration by the High Court. The judgment does not record 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

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA No.828/2008 BETWEEN : 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE.

2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1) C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD

BANGALORE. .. APPELLANTS (By Sri K V ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : SMT U LAKSHMI L/R OF T V UMESH GUPTA No.28/D, 37TH CROSS 8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri. R B KRISHNA, ADV.) This ITA filed u/S.260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 11-03-2008 passed in ITA No. 832/BANG/2007, for the Assessment Year 2002-03, praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

2 i. formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein, ii. allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT Bangalore in ITA No. 832/BANG/2007, dated 11-03-2008 confirm the orders of the Appellate Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-3(1), Bangalore. This ITA coming on for final hearing this day, K.SREEDHAR RAO, J, delivered the following: JUDGMENT In view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Guffic CHEM (P) Ltd, -vs- Commissioner of Income Tax & anr. reported in (2011) 332 ITR 602, the questions of law are answered against the revenue. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE bkm.

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 →