PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS P. LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/260/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01049783201612 October 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal with liberty granted to the revenue to revive it. This was based on the assessee's submission regarding the tax effect and the revenue's request for liberty.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The assessee's counsel pointed out that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, making the appeal potentially not maintainable.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal before the High Court due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

I.T.A. NO.260 OF 2016

BETWEEN:

1.

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5

BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA

BANGALORE-560001.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE.

... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.)

AND:

M/S. ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS P. LTD., NO.1, GOLD AVENUE ADJOINING KGA GOLD COURSE OLD AIRPORT ROAD, KODIHALLI BANGALORE-560008 PAN: AABCR 0111 M. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R.B. KRISHNA, ADV.) - - -

THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 10-11-2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.846/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT

YEAR 2001-11, PRAYING 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 SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 10-11-2015 PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘C’ BENCH, BENGALURU, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN ITA NO.846/BANG/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the revenue has entered appearance through video conferencing. Mr.R.B.Krishna, learned counsel for the respondent has entered appearance through video conferencing.

2.

Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the tax effect in this appeal is less than `1 Crore and therefore, the appeal may not be maintainable in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

3.

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 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

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 →