THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CYBER PARK DEVELOPMENT

PDF · subscribers
ITA/79/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01019285201705 October 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that a previous appeal concerning the validity of the Section 263 order had already been decided by this Court. Consequently, the substantial questions of law in the present appeal became academic.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that annulled an assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263. The ITAT had annulled the assessment order because a prior Section 263 order, which led to the assessment, had been set aside.

What were the issues?

Whether an assessment order passed pursuant to a Section 263 order, which itself has been set aside, can survive when an appeal against the setting aside of the Section 263 order is pending.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH 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.79 OF 2017 BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA

BENGALURU-560095.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

CIRCLE-2(1)(1), 2ND FLOOR

BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD

KORMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V. ARAVIND., ADV.,)

AND:

M/S. CYBER PARK DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., PLOT NO.76 & 77, 5TH FLOOR ELECTRONICS CITY, PHASE-I HOSUR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU-560100 PAN: AACCC 1113H. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) - - -

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29.07.2016 PASSED IN ITA

NO.1277/BANG/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED 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.1277/BANG/2015 DATED 29.07.2016 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU.

THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2006-07. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 25.10.2017 on the following substantial question of law:

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, that the Tribunal was right in annulling the order passed by the assessing authority under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act by holding that as the order passed under section 263 dated

28.12.2010 has been set aside by it vide order dated 28.12.2011 in ITA No.226/Bang/2011, the assessment order now passed in pursuance to the CIT’s order under section 263 of the Act does not survive even when the said order has not reached finality as the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.115/2012 is pending before this Hon’ble High Court.

2.

This court by a detailed order passed in ITA No.115/2012 has upheld the validity of the order passed by the Tribunal, by which the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Act has been quashed. Therefore, the substantial questions of law involved in this appeal are rendered academic and therefore, it is not necessary for us to answer the same.

In the result, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE ss

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →