THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.FIRST ADVANTAGE GLOBAL OPERATING CENTRE PVT. LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/684/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC01031359201927 September 2024Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal based on the tax effect being less than Rs. 2 Crores, citing CBDT Circulars. The question of law was kept open for future adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order concerning the assessment year 2005-06. The appeal was admitted on a substantial question of law regarding the Tribunal's consideration of Rule 10-B of the Income Tax Rules.

What were the issues?

Whether the Tribunal failed to consider Rule 10-B of the Income Tax Rules. Whether the appeal should be entertained due to low tax effect as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40402-DB ITA No. 684 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.684 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 095.

2.

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE 3(1)(1), PRESENT ADDRESS, JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE -3, 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 095 …APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. DILIP M ., ADVOCATE A/W SRI. RAVIRAJ Y.V., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40402-DB ITA No. 684 of 2019

AND:

M/S. FIRST ADVANTAGE GLOBAL OPERATING CENTRE PVT. LTD., LTD, (M/S. FIRST ADVANTAGE OFFSHORE SERVICES PVT. LTD), LEVEL-1, EXPLORER BUILDING, INTERNATIONAL PARK, WHITEFIELD ROAD, BENGALURLU 560 066. PAN AAACZ1029M …RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. M.R. VANAJA, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 03.04.2019 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO. 888/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006, PRAYING TO I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40402-DB ITA No. 684 of 2019

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

Heard the learned counsel Sri. Dilip.M., along with Sri. Raviraj.Y.V., learned counsel for appellants/Revenue and learned counsel Smt.M.R.Vanaja for respondent/assessee.

2.

The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) questioning the correctness and legality of order dated 03.04.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in IT(TP)A.No.888/Bang/2013 for the assessment year 2005-06.

3.

This

Court,

admitted the appeal on 09.01.2020 to consider the following substantial question of law:

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40402-DB ITA No. 684 of 2019

"Whether the Tribunal while passing the impugned order has failed to take into account the provisions contained in Rule 10-B of the Income Tax Rules?"

4.

Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal should not be entertained at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue.

5.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the matter falls within the exceptions under the aforesaid Circular dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024.

6.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned

- 5 -

NC: 2024:KHC:40402-DB ITA No. 684 of 2019

counsel for the revenue. However, the question of law is kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

SMJ List No.: 4 Sl No.: 13

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 →