THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. CGI INFORMATION SYSTEMS &

PDF · subscribers
ITA/924/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01059336200712 September 2012Bench: B.MANOHAR,K.SREEDHAR RAO2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that there did not appear to be any good grounds to interfere with the impugned order passed by the ITAT. The ITAT had condoned the delay and remitted the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for consideration on merits. The High Court found no reason to disturb this decision. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The ratio decidendi is that if an appellate tribunal has condoned a delay and remitted a matter for fresh consideration on merits, the High Court should not interfere unless there are compelling grounds to do so. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (The Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer) against an order dated July 6, 2007, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore. The ITAT had condoned a delay and remitted the matter back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for consideration on merits. The assessment year in question is 2003-2004. The assessee is CGI Information Systems & Management Consultants. The Revenue sought to set aside the ITAT's order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should formulate substantial questions of law and allow the appeal to set aside the order of the ITAT, Bangalore, which had remitted the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for consideration on merits. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The assessee is the respondent in the appeal before the High Court. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, being the appellant, contended that the High Court should interfere with the ITAT's order and set it aside. The judgment does not detail the specific grounds or legal provisions relied upon by the Revenue for this contention, other than the general prayer to formulate substantial questions of law.

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, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR I.T.A. No.924 OF 2007 BETWEEN:- 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, C.R. Building, Queens Road, Bangalore. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-19(1), Bangalore. Appellants (By Sri K.V. Aravind, Advocate) AND:- CGI Information Systems & Management Consultants, 38/1, Naganathapura, Electronic City Post, Bangalore-100. Respondent (By Sri K.S. Ramabhadran, Advocate) This I.T.A. is filed U/s.260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 06.07.2007 passed in

2 I.T.A.No.373/BNG/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 and (ii) allow the appeal and set-aside the order of the ITAT, Bangalore in ITA No.373/Bang/2006 dated 06.07.2007 confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner, Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity. This appeal is coming on for final hearing this day, SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following: J U D G M E N T The Appellate Tribunal has condoned the delay and remitted the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for consideration on merits. There does not appear any good grounds to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE NM*

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 →