THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PRAKRITI NIRMAN PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/905/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01058767200730 October 2012Bench: B.V.PINTO,K.SREEDHAR RAO2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not maintainable. The court relied on its own decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Ranka, 72, DTR 270, which held that Circular 3/11 applies to pending appeals. Since the monetary limit of the appeal was Rs. 8,00,000/-, which was below the threshold prescribed by the circular, the appeal was dismissed on grounds of maintainability. The court noted that the Revenue had preferred an SLP before the Supreme Court. The appeal was disposed of with liberty granted to the Revenue to make an application for revival of the appeal for disposal on merits if they succeeded in the SLP.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (the Revenue) against an order dated July 6, 2007, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore, in ITA No. 61/BANG/2006. The assessment year in question was 2003-2004. The Revenue sought to set aside the ITAT's order and confirm the order of the Appellate Commissioner, which in turn had confirmed the order of the Income Tax Officer. The monetary limit of the appeal was Rs. 8,00,000/-. The Revenue had also preferred a Special Leave Petition (SLP) No. 27468/2012 before the Supreme Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is maintainable in light of the monetary limit prescribed by Circular 3/11, considering the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Ranka, 72, DTR 270? The Revenue contended that the appeal was maintainable and sought to set aside the ITAT's order. The Revenue relied on the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Ranka, 72, DTR 270, to argue that Circular 3/11 applies to pending appeals. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent assessee, M/s Prakriti Nirman Pvt. Ltd., on the maintainability of the appeal or the merits of the case.

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 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.V.PINTO ITA No.905/2007 BETWEEN : 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD-12 (1), C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. APPELLANTS ( By SRI K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S PRAKRITI NIRMAN PVT. LTD., 'APARNA', NO.2208, HAL III STAGE, 80 FT ROAD, KODIHALLI, BANGALORE-560 008. RESPONDENT (BY SRI C.P. RAMASWAMI, ADVOCATE )

2 This ITA is filed u/S.260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 06-07-2007 passed in ITA No. 61/BANG/2006 for the Assessment Year 2003-2004, 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, Bangalore in ITA No.61/Bang/2007 dated 06-07-2007 & confirm the order of the Appellate Commissioner confirming the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity. This Appeal is coming on for hearing this day, SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following: JUDGMENT The monetary limit of this appeal is Rs.8,00,000/-. In view of the decision of this court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Ranka, 72, DTR 270, the appeal would not be maintainable, since it is held that the circular 3/11 applies to pending appeal. The revenue, however has preferred SLP No.27468/2012 before the Supreme Court. In view of the decision of this court, the appeal is dismissed. However, if the appellant/revenue succeeds in SLP, they are at liberty to make an application for revival of this appeal for disposal on merits. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE psg*

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 →