THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S THE SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT

PDF · subscribers
ITA/46/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01050954201811 October 2022Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged that the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal were covered by prior judgments. Consequently, the questions of law were held against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an ITAT order that confirmed the Assessing Officer's decision. The respondent argued that the substantial questions of law were covered by previous High Court decisions.

What were the issues?

Whether the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal are covered by previous High Court decisions. The core issue revolves around the applicability of prior rulings to the present appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA I.T.A. No.46 OF 2018

BETWEEN

1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A) C R BUILDING, ATTAVARA MANGALURU-575001

2 . THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1) C R BUILDING, ATTAVARA MANGALURU-575001 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND

M/S THE SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD 14-7-1011, POST BOX NO.721 SADASHIVA SAHAKARA SADANA KODIALBAIL, MANGALURU KARNATAKA-575003 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI A SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI M LAVA, ADVOCATE )

2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 08.09.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO. 18/PAN/2017, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-2014, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI IN ITA NO. 18/PAN/2017 DATED 08.09.2017 CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), MANGALURU AND ETC.,

THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY P.S. DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Sri Shankar, learned Senior Advocate for the respondent submits that two substantial questions of law raised in this appeal on 09.11.2018 are covered by the decisions in the case of The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, CIT(A) and another Vs. M/s. South Canara District, Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., in ITA No.115/2016 and ITA No.393/2016 decided on 14.12.2021.

2.

The said submission is not disputed by Sri.E.I.Sanmathi, learned standing counsel for the appellants.

3.

In view of the above, substantial questions of law raised in this appeal are held against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee and this appeal stands disposed of.

SD/-

JUDGE

SD/-

JUDGE

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 →