SRI M R SEETHARAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
WTA/4/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01046450201716 January 2020Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the ITAT had allowed the assessee's appeal and quashed the assessment order solely on the ground of non-service of notice under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, without adjudicating the other grounds raised by the assessee on merits. The revenue had filed an appeal (WTA No.20/2017) against the ITAT's order, which was pending. The Court also mentioned that another appeal (WTA No.26/2017) had been dismissed on monetary limits. Given these circumstances, the Court stated that the question of entertaining the present appeal would not arise at that juncture. However, the Court made it clear that if the revenue's appeal (WTA No.20/2017) were to be revived for any reason, the assessee would also be entitled to seek the revival of their appeal. With these observations, the appeal was disposed of.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri.M.R.Seetharam, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'A' Bench, Bengaluru, dated 29.11.2016, pertaining to the assessment year 2006-2007. The ITAT had allowed the assessee's appeal and quashed the assessment order on the ground of non-service of notice under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, thereby declaring the reopening of assessment as bad. However, the ITAT had not adjudicated other grounds raised by the assessee on merits. The revenue had also filed an appeal (WTA No.20/2017) against the ITAT's order. The High Court had previously dismissed another appeal (WTA No.26/2017) on grounds of monetary limits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain the assessee's appeal when the revenue's appeal against the same ITAT order is pending and the High Court has previously dismissed another appeal on monetary limits. (Question of law and fact, turning on procedural aspects and court's discretion). Assessee's Contention: The assessee is in appeal because the ITAT did not adjudicate the other grounds raised on merits, despite allowing the appeal on a procedural ground. The assessee seeks to have these grounds decided in their favour. Revenue's Contention: The revenue has filed an appeal (WTA No.20/2017) against the ITAT's order quashing the assessment. The revenue's counsel submits that the High Court had dismissed another appeal (WTA No.26/2017) on monetary limits, implying this appeal might also face similar issues or be dependent on the outcome of the revenue's pending appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 17

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16TH 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.4 OF 2017 BETWEEN:

SRI.M.R.SEETHARAM GOKULA HOUSE, GOKULA, MATHIKERE, BANGALORE – 560 054.

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

AND:

1.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

OF WEALTH TAX, CIRCLE 6(1),

PRESENTLY CIRCLE 6(3) (1),

BMTC BUILDING, 4TH FLOOR,

6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,

BENGALURU – 560 095.

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH

TAX (APPEALS)-III,

BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,

6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,

BENGALURU – 560 095.

... RESPONDENTS

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

THIS APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 27-A OF WEALTH TAX ACT 1957, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29.11.2016 PASSED IN WTA NO.32/BANG/2014, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007, PRAYING (A) TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT (B) TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU IN WTA No.32/BANG/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 DATED 29/11/2016 VIDE ANNEXURE – A AND (C) TO PASS SUCH ORDERS, AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

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

JUDGMENT

Heard Sri.A.Shankar, learned Senior Counsel for Sri.M.Lava appearing for appellant.

2.

Perusal of the order of the Tribunal would indicate that Tribunal has passed order in question by allowing the assessees appeal and quashing the assessment order on account of non service of notice under Section 17 of Wealth Tax Act, 1957 and therefore, re-opening of the assessment was declared bad. In fact, Tribunal has not adjudicated with regard to other grounds urged by the assessee on merits. On account of other grounds raised by assessee before the Tribunal on merits having not been adjudicated assessee is in appeal.

3.

Sri.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for respondent submits that revenue has preferred an appeal against the order of the Tribunal quashing

assessment order on account of non service of notice in WTA No.20/2017 and same is pending before this Court. However, by order dated 24.10.2019, we have dismissed WTA No.26/2017 on the ground of monetary limits. As such, question of entertaining this appeal would not arise. However, we make it clear that if for any reason, appeal of the revenue i.e. W.T.A No.20/2017 is revived for any reason whatsoever, the assessee would also be entitled to seek for revival of this appeal. With these observations, this appeal stands disposed of.

SD/- JUDGE

SD/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 17

All 167 judgments and leading authorities on Section 17 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →