THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SAI BHAGAWAN TRADERS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/382/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01030886201627 January 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal. Liberty was granted to the revenue to revive the appeal if the matter falls within the exceptions of the CBDT circular.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The assessee's counsel argued that the appeal should not be entertained due to the tax effect being less than Rs. 1 Crore, citing a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is maintainable given the tax effect and the CBDT circular. The court's decision hinges on the applicability of the circular to the revenue's appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY I.T.A. NO.382 OF 2016 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA

BANGALORE-560095. 2. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER

WARD-1, 2ND FLOOR

BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD

KORMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095. .... APPELLANTS (BY MR. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. SAI BHAGAWAN TRADERS C/O, M/S. CHALLAKERE SOLVENTS & REFINERY LTD., HOTTEPPANAHALLI VILLAGE CHALLAKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT PAN: AAYFS 0634G. ... RESPONDENT (BY MR. S. ANNAMALAI, ADV., FOR MR. M. LAVA, ADV.,) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 20.10.2015 PASSED

2 IN ITA NO.16/BANG/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, PRAYING TO: (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.16/BANG/2014 DATED 20-10-2015 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BENGALURU. (iii) PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Mr.S.Annamalai, learned counsel for the assessee. 2. Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.1 Crore and therefore, the appeal should not be entertained at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in

3 case the matter falls within the exceptions under the aforesaid Circular dated 08.08.2019. 4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV

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 →