COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI M.R.JAYARAM (HUF)

WTA/14/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01039647201529 January 2020Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the contention of the Revenue that Circular No.17/2019 is prospective and cannot be applied to pending matters is not acceptable. The Court relied on the law laid down by a Coordinate Bench in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER V/S RANKA & RANKA (2013) 352 ITR 121 (KARN), which was affirmed by the Apex Court in DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V/S S.R.M.B DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD. (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC). These precedents establish that the scope of Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is applicable to pending proceedings. Furthermore, the Court noted that the CBDT itself issued an instruction (F.No.279/MISC/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019) intimating that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable to all pending SLPs/appeals/cross objections/references. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable in view of the prior order passed in WTA No.26/2017 dated 24.10.2019.

What were the facts?

This appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax against an order dated 31.03.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'A' Bench, Bengaluru, in WTA No.18/Bang/2014 for the Assessment Year 2005-2006. The ITAT's order was a common order passed in multiple appeals and cross-objections. The appellants sought to set aside the ITAT's order. The appeal was filed under Section 27-A of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The High Court noted that a Coordinate Bench had previously dismissed a similar appeal (WTA No.26/2017) on monetary limits fixed by Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether Circular No.17/2019, which sets monetary limits for filing appeals, is prospective or retrospective in its application to pending matters. The Revenue contended that Circular No.17/2019 is prospective and cannot be applied to pending matters. The Revenue relied on its contention that the circular should not affect appeals already filed or pending before the courts. The Assessee did not explicitly record arguments in this portion of the judgment. However, the High Court's reasoning implies that the Assessee would have supported the application of the circular to pending matters, likely referencing the precedents cited by the Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

27-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WEALTH TAX APPEAL NO.14 OF 2015 BETWEEN:

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,

BENGALURU – 560 001.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

OF WEALTH TAX,

CIRCLE 6(1),

BENGALURU.

... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI.M.R.JAYARAM (HUF) GOKULA HOUSE, GOKULA, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU. PAN:AGDPS5886M ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.A.SHANKAR, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI. M.LAVA, ADVOCATE)

THIS APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 27-A OF WEALTH TAX ACT 1957, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31.03.2015 PASSED IN WTA NO.18/BANG/2014, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006, PRAYING TO 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 SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2015 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN WTA NO.18/BANG/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is directed against the order dated 31.03.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in WTA No.18/Bang/2014. Said order is a common order passed in WTA Nos.16 to 29/Bang/2014 and CO Nos.86 to 97/Bang/2014.

Under similar circumstances, Coordinate Bench in WTA No.26/2017 by order dated 24.10.2019

dismissed the said appeal on monetary limits fixed in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019.

However, learned counsel appearing for Revenue would contend that said Circular is prospective and cannot be made applicable to the pending matters, which we are not inclined to accept in the light of law laid down by Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER V/S RANKA & RANKA reported in (2013) 352 ITR 121 (KARN), wherein it has been held that scope of Circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes would be applicable to the pending proceedings, which also came to be affirmed by Apex Court in the case DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V/S S.R.M.B DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD. reported in (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC) vide paragraph 23. In fact, Central Board of Direct Taxes has also issued an instruction bearing No.F.No.279/MISC/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019 intimating all the Principal Chief

Commissioners of Income Tax that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable on all pending SLPs/appeals/cross objections/references. Hence, contention of learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi stands rejected.

In the light of aforesaid facts, the present appeal as already noticed herein above, being an off shoot of common order passed by ITAT, this appeal also deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable in view of aforestated order passed in WTA No.26/2017 dated 24.10.2019.

All pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand consigned to records.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE UN

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →