PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 vs. M/S. ASIANET TV HOLDINGS PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/467/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC01025387201914 January 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it did not possess the appellate or supervisory jurisdiction to examine the correctness of the ITAT's order. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable before this court.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai Bench. The High Court raised an objection regarding its jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

What were the issues?

The key issue was whether the High Court of Karnataka had the jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against an order passed by the ITAT, Mumbai Bench.

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 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.467 OF 2019

Between:

1.

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, BMTC Complex, Koramangala, Bengaluru.

2.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranga -8(1), Mumbai, Nor the jurisdiction lies with: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -4(1), (1) Bangalore.

… Appellants

(By Sri. Sanmathi, E.I., Advocate)

And: M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Pvt., Ltd., R.R.Gupta & Associates, CAS, B-6, Shalimar CHS Ltd., Opp. Khira Indl. Estate, B.w. Bhargava Road, Santacruz (w), Mumbai -400 054.

… Respondent

This Income Tax Appeal is filed under Section 260- A of Income Tax Act, 1961 praying to (1) 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. (2) Set aside the appellate order dated 01.03.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate, ‘A’ Bench, Mumbai, in appeal proceedings No.ITA/4790/Mum/2014 (Annexure –A) for the assessment year 2009-2010 as sought for in this appeal; and to grant such other relief as deemed fit, in the interest of justice.

This appeal coming on for Orders, this day, Alok Aradhe J., delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Registry has raised following objection: “How the above ITA is maintainable at High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, when the impugned order in ITA No.4790/Mum/2014, dated 01.03.2019 passed by ITAT at Mumbai Bench, to be clarified.”

2.

Revenue has called in question order dated 01.03.2019 passed in ITA No.4790/Mum/2014 by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Mumbai, (for short ‘ITAT’). As this Court does not possess appellate jurisdiction as well as supervisory jurisdiction, examining the correctness and legality of the order passed by ITAT does not arise.

3.

Office objection is sustained. Appeal is held as not maintainable and accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. Registry is directed to return the certified copy of order passed by ITAT on same being substituted by photocopy and appellant would be at liberty to file fresh appeal before the jurisdictional High Court within an outer limit of eight (8) weeks from today. It is made clear that time spent by the appellant before this Court from the date of filing of this appeal i.e., 19.08.2019 till date of filing of appeal before the jurisdictional High Court, shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

BVK

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 →