PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/237/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01051870201728 September 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.I.ARUN3 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 it falls under the exceptions mentioned in the CBDT circular.

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 a CBDT circular, making the appeal potentially not maintainable.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of the appeal before the High Court in light of the CBDT circular regarding tax effect.

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 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I. ARUN

I.T.A. NO.237 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

1.

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL

QUUENS ROAD, BANGALORE.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CIRCLE-12(4), BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.)

AND:

M/S. RAJESH EXPORTS LTD NO.4, BATAVIA CHAMBERS K.R. ROAD, K.P. WEST BANGALORE-560001 PAN:AAACR8642N. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SAMPATH KUMAR K, ADV.,) - - -

THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31-05-2016 PASSED IN ITA NO.859/BANG/2010, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, VIDE ANNEXURE-A PRAYING TO:

I. 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. II. SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 31-05-2016 PASSED BY THE ITAT, ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS ITA NO.859/BANG/2010 DATED 31-5-2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A), AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL; AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTCE.

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. Mr.Sampath Kumar K., learned counsel for the assessee.

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 →