THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S SHIVA FERRIC PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/404/2023HC KarnatakaKAHC01027896202330 September 2024Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal, granting the Revenue liberty to revive it if exceptions under the relevant CBDT circulars are met. The substantial questions of law were kept open for future adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that quashed a CIT order passed under Section 263. The assessee argued that the appeal should not be entertained due to low tax effect as per CBDT circulars.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT order was perverse in quashing the CIT's Section 263 order, and if the tax effect threshold for appeals is met.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41206-DB ITA No. 404 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH 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. 404 OF 2023 BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, 3RD FLOOR, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU -560001

2.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL, PRESENT ADDRESS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU -560001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. RAVIRAJ Y V, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S SHIVA FERRIC PVT LTD NO 193, 4TH FLOOR, SHIV SADAN OUTER RING ROAD, B NARAYANAPURA BENGALURU -560016 PAN NO AAICS4564L …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAGADISHCHANDRA KAMATH.K.,ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE, ALLOW THE

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41206-DB ITA No. 404 of 2023

APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLANT TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 380/BANG/2022 DATED 24.01.2023 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013 ANNEXURE- C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE U/S 263 CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(1), BENGALURU AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL 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

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

Heard the learned counsel Sri. Dilip. M., along with Sri. Raviraj. Y.V., for appellants/Revenue and learned counsel Sri. Jagadishchandra., learned counsel for the 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 24.01.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA No.380/Bang/2022 for the assessment year 2012-13, raising the following substantial questions of law:

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41206-DB ITA No. 404 of 2023

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature quashing order passed by CIT under section 263 of the Act by holding that there was no justification in passing the order since assessee had availed the DTVSV Scheme and settled the demand ignoring that the same will not preclude CIT fro exercising jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act and conditions for invoking section 263 of the were fully satisfied in present case? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature in coming to the conclusion that assessing officer would not have assessed the premium amount and that the amount towards face value of the shares is part and parcel of the entire proceedings for which the assessee opted DTSVS without verification of the documents in this regard?”

3.

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:41206-DB ITA No. 404 of 2023

Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue.

4.

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.

5.

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

BS List No.: 4 Sl No.: 37

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 →