THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/275/2023HC KarnatakaKAHC01020741202330 September 2024Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

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

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that allowed the assessee's appeal, treating it as consequential to a previous year's decision. The Revenue argued the previous decision was not final and contained contradictions.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT's order was perverse by relying on an undecided previous year's decision and if the rectification order under Section 154 was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 154,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41202-DB ITA No. 275 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. 275 OF 2023 BETWEEN:

1.

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

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) 3RD FLOOR, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560001. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. RAVIRAJ Y V, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PVT LTD NO. 46/A, CONCORDE GROUP 1ST MAIN, III PHASE, J.P.NAGAR, BENGALURU 5660078 PAN. AADCC4087F. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S V.,ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41202-DB ITA No. 275 of 2023

SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.700/BANG/2022 DATED 06.12.2022 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018 ANNEXURE D AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRLCE 1(4), BENGALURU AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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. Ravi Shankar. S.V., 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 06.12.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA No.700/Bang/2022 for the assessment year 2017-18, raising the following substantial questions of law:

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41202-DB ITA No. 275 of 2023

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse as Tribunal has allowed the appeal preferred by assesse by treating it as consequential on the basis of its decision for A.Y.2013-14 when the decision for said year has not reacted finality? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in allowing consequential relief to the assesse when its earlier order passed for A.Y.2013-14 is self contradictory as therein the Tribunal has held that the issue to be debatable and that assessing officer could not have rectified the assessment order for A.Y.2013-14 but at the same time allowed the appeal of the assesse by holding that the assessing officer should have rectified the assessment order on basis of rectification application filed by assesse? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside order passed under section 154 r/w/s 143(3) of the Act

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41202-DB ITA No. 275 of 2023

dated 30.07.2021 when the conditions set out in section 154 are fully satisfied in facts of present case and additions made in said order are in accordance with provisions of the Act?”

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 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

- 5 -

NC: 2024:KHC:41202-DB ITA No. 275 of 2023

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.: 35

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 →