PR.COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S PODAR EDUCATION TRUST

PDF · subscribers
ITA/864/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01044087201705 December 2017Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, while hearing the appeal for admission, noted the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants. The counsel fairly submitted that the question raised in this appeal has already been answered against the appellants by this Court in the case of CIT v. Karnataka Reddy Janasangha [(2016) 389 ITR 229 (Karn)]. Based on this submission, the Court found no reason to entertain the appeal further. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. No specific findings on the merits of the ITAT's order were made by the High Court, as the dismissal was based on a prior precedent.

What were the facts?

The appellants, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Circle-1, Bangalore, have filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal challenges an order dated May 31, 2017, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'A' Bench, Bangalore, in ITA No. 766/Bang/2016. The assessment year in question is 2012-2013. The respondent is M/s Podar Education Trust. The appeal is presented for admission.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the substantial questions of law, which are to be formulated, are to be decided in favour of the appellants or the respondent. The appellants are seeking to set aside the order of the ITAT. The specific substantial questions of law are not detailed in the judgment, but the appeal is filed under Section 260-A of the IT Act, 1961, which pertains to appeals to the High Court. The appellants' counsel submits that the question raised in the appeal has been answered against them by this Court. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded, other than their submission that the question is answered against them. The assessee's contentions are not recorded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.864/2017

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.864/2017

BETWEEN : 1. PR.COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)

MISSIONS ROAD, BANGALORE

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

OF INCOME TAX (E), CIRCLE-1

BANGALORE

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND : M/S PODAR EDUCATION TRUST

103/1, BASAVANPUR OFF. BANNERGATTA ROAD BANGALORE

...RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.05.2017 PASSED BY THE ITAT ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.766/BANG/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ITA No.864/2017

-2-

JUDGMENT Ag.CJ (Oral):

Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submits that the question raised in this appeal is answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Karnataka Reddy Janasangha [(2016) 389 ITR 229 (Karn)]. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

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 →