PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 vs. M/S IZMO LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/8/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01038583202010 September 2026Bench: S.G.PANDIT,CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeals were not maintainable. This decision was based on Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, which enhanced the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court to Rs. 2,00,00,000/-. The Court observed that the tax effect in the present appeals was less than this enhanced limit. The circular was deemed applicable to pending appeals as well. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed. However, liberty was granted to the appellants (Revenue) to seek revival of the appeals if any exceptions to the circular were made out. No decision was made on the merits of the original ITAT orders.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against M/s. Izmo Ltd (Assessee). The appeals concerned Assessment Year 2011-2012 (ITA No. 8 of 2021) and Assessment Year 2010-2011 (ITA No. 7 of 2021). The orders under challenge were dated 29/01/2020, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'B' Bench, Bengaluru, in IT(TP)A No. 186/BANG/2016 and IT(TP)A No. 453/BANG/2015, respectively. The appeals were filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeals filed by the Revenue were maintainable. The Revenue contended that the appeals were filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking to set aside the orders of the ITAT. The Assessee was represented by its counsel. The Court noted that the tax effect in both appeals was less than Rs. 2,00,00,000/-. The Revenue relied on the provisions of Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the subsequent 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/- and was applicable to pending appeals.

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 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 8 OF 2021 C/W INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2021

IN ITA NO. 8/2021

BETWEEN:

1.

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -3(1) (1) BENGALURU. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANMATHI E. I., ADV. A/W SRI DILIP M., ADV.)

AND:

M/S. IZMO LTD (FORMERLY LOGIX MICROSYSTEMS LTD) NO.177/2C, BILEKAHALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE -560076 PAN:AAACL3000E …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. TATA KRISHNA, ADV.)

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: High Court of Karnataka HC-KAR THIS APPEAL IS UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29/01/2020 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.186/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012, PRAYING THIS TO (1) DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND (2) SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 29/01/2020 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, B BENCH, BENGALURU, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE'S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. IT(TP)A NO.186/BANG/2016 (ANNEXURE-A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012 AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

IN ITA NO. 7/2021

BETWEEN:

1.

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3 (1) (1) BENGALURU. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANMATHI E. I., ADV. A/W SRI DILIP M., ADV.)

AND:

M/S. IZMO LTD (FORMERLY LOGIX MICROSYSTEMS LTD) NO.177/2C, BILEKAHALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE-560076 PAN-AAACL3000E ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. TATA KRISHNA, ADV.)

HC-KAR THIS APPEAL IS UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29/01/2020 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.453/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011, PRAYING TO (1) DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND / OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND (2) SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 29/01/2020 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, BENGALURU, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE'S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. IT(TP)A NO. 453/BANG/2015 (ANNEXURE-A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

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

Heard learned counsel Sri.Sanmathi.E.I., along with Sri.Dilip.M., learned counsel for appellants and learned counsel Sri.Tata Krishna for respondent. Perused the entire appeal papers.

2.

It is pointed out that the tax effect in the above appeals are less than Rs.2,00,00,000/-. Under Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, the Ministry of Finance, HC-KAR 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.

3.

In the light of the above, the appeals are 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.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

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 →