THE PR. COMMISSIONER vs. M/S. OM SAI RIDDHI SIDDHI DEVELOPERS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/218/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01014536202130 July 2026Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K.MANMADHA RAO3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not maintainable. The Court referred to Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, which enhanced the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court to Rs. 2,00,00,000/-. The Court noted that this circular would apply to pending appeals as well. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. However, liberty was granted to the appellants to seek revival of the appeal if any exceptions were made out.

What were the facts?

The appellants, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Karnataka. The appeal arose from an order dated 24.08.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru, in ITA No. 2334/BANG/2019. This ITAT order had confirmed the order of the Appellate Commissioner, which in turn had confirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year in question is 2014-2015. The respondent is M/s. Om Sai Riddhi Siddhi Developers. The tax effect in the appeal was stated to be Rs. 1,73,68,294/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court given the tax effect and the prevailing monetary limits for filing appeals. The Revenue contended that the appeal was filed in accordance with the law applicable at the time of filing. The Revenue relied on the fact that the tax effect was Rs. 1,73,68,294/-, which was above the then-applicable monetary limit. The Respondent did not record any specific arguments on this point in the judgment. The Tribunal had to decide whether the appeal was maintainable in light of subsequent circulars enhancing the monetary limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 218 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (A) CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDNG, QUEEN’S ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCEL-1, C.R.BUILDING, ATTAVARA MANGALURU -575001. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y. V., AND SRI. M. DILIP, ADVS.)

AND:

M/S. OM SAI RIDDHI SIDDHI DEVELOPERS AGARWAL TRADE CENTRE, SHOP NO.154, 154, SECTOR-11, CBD BELAPUR, NAVI MUMBAI-400614, PAN.AACFO4848G. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. BORKAR SHEETAL SUBODH, ADV.)

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 24.08.2020 PASSED IN ITA NO.2334/BANG/2019, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014- 2015, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE; ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: High Court of Karnataka HC-KAR ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.2334/BANG/2019 DATED 24.08.2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 ANNEXURE-C CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

Heard learned counsel Sri.Y.V.Raviraj, senior standing counsel for appellants and perused the entire appeal papers.

2.

It is pointed out that the tax effect in the above appeal is Rs.1,73,68,294/-. Under Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes has enhanced the Monetary Limit to file appeals before the High Court to Rs.2,00,00,000/-. The said circular would apply even to pending appeals also.

HC-KAR

3.

In the light of the above, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. However, liberty is granted to the appellants to seek revival of the appeal, if any exceptions are made out.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE

NC CT:bms

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 →