Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
- 1 -
NC: 2024:KHC:39744-DB ITA No. 19 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH 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. 19 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE.
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(2), NEW DELHI. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SANMATHI E I, ADVOCATE)
AND: 1. M/S TECHNOTREE CONVERGENCE LTD., 16TH FLOOR, DLF BUILDING, NO.5, TOWER -A, DLB CYBER CITY PH-III, GURGAON 12202, PAN AAACL7345L. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI K R VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 22/07/2021 PASSED IN ITA NO.2830/DEL/2013 AND MP NO.10/BANG/2021 DATED: 16/03/2021, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT 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 ETC.
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
Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2024:KHC:39744-DB ITA No. 19 of 2022
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
Heard the learned counsel Sri.Sanmathi.E.I., for appellants/Revenue and learned counsel Sri.K.R.Vasudevan for respondent/assessee.
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 22.07.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.2830/DEL/2013 and M.P.No.10/Bang/2021 dated 16.03.2021 for the assessment year 2008-09.
This
Court,
admitted the appeal on 07.06.2022 to consider the following substantial question of law: “(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature as the Tribunal has held that export proceeds received even after six
- 3 -
NC: 2024:KHC:39744-DB ITA No. 19 of 2022
months from the end of the previous year be included in export turnover for computing deduction under Section 10A of the Act ignoring Section 10A(3) of the Act which does not permitted to be included while computing 10A deduction?
(2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in holding that export proceeds received beyond period stipulated is also liable to be included even though the competent authority had not allowed any further period for export receipts in terms of Section 10A(3) of the Act?
(3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing miscellaneous petition by holding that it’s a case of incorrect understanding of facts even though this is beyond the scope of Section 254(2) of the Act?”
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
- 4 -
NC: 2024:KHC:39744-DB ITA No. 19 of 2022
Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue.
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.
In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned 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
MPK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 32