SRI M R SEETHARAM (HUF) vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
WTA/5/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01030269201716 January 2020Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of the assessee's appeal by observing that the revenue had preferred an appeal (WTA No.20/2017) against the ITAT's order quashing the assessment. The High Court noted that by an order of even date, WTA No.20/2017 had been dismissed on the ground of monetary limits. Consequently, the High Court held that the question of entertaining the assessee's appeal would not arise. 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. The appeal was disposed of with these observations.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri.M.R.Seetharam (HUF), filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'A' Bench, Bengaluru, dated November 29, 2016, concerning Assessment Year 2006-2007. The ITAT had allowed the assessee's appeal and quashed the assessment order, finding it bad on account of non-service of notice under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. However, the ITAT had not adjudicated on other grounds raised by the assessee on merits. The revenue had also filed an appeal (WTA No.20/2017) against the ITAT's order, which was pending before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain the assessee's appeal when the ITAT has not adjudicated on all grounds raised by the assessee on merits, having quashed the assessment order on a procedural ground (non-service of notice under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957)? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that since the ITAT had not adjudicated on the merits of the case, and the assessment order was quashed on a procedural technicality, the assessee is entitled to have the merits adjudicated. The assessee sought to have the substantial questions of law formulated and answered in their favour, and the ITAT's findings set aside to the extent they were against the appellant. Revenue's Contention: The revenue submitted that they had filed an appeal (WTA No.20/2017) against the ITAT's order quashing the assessment. The revenue noted that this appeal was pending before the High Court. The revenue's primary argument, as understood from the court's disposition, was that the assessee's appeal should not be entertained in light of the pending revenue appeal and the court's decision on monetary limits.

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.5 OF 2017 BETWEEN:

SRI.M.R.SEETHARAM (HUF) REPRESENTED BY KARTHA 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.33/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.33/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 ORDERS 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.

2.

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 of even date, we have dismissed WTA No.20/2017 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 whatsoever appeal of the revenue i.e. W.T.A No.20/2017 is revived, assessee would also be entitled to seek for revival of this appeal. With these observations, this appeal stands disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE UN

More judgments on Section 17

All 167 judgments and leading authorities on Section 17 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →