THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. MIND TREE CONSULTING LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/177/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01020738201325 August 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged that the tax effect was below the threshold stipulated in the CBDT circular. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The respondent submitted that the tax effect in the appeal was less than ₹1 Crore, making it not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

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 prescribed by the CBDT circular.

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 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

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

I.T.A. NO.177 OF 2013

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

LTU, JSS TOWERS

BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE.

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

LTU, JSS TOWERS

BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.)

AND:

M/S. MIND TREE CONSULTING LTD., (FORMERLY MIND TREE CONSULTING PVT. LTD.,) GLOBAL VILLAGE, RVCE POST MYLASANDRA, MYSORE ROAD BANGALORE-560059. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. CHYTHANYA K.K. ADV.) - - -

THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31.10.2012

PASSED IN ITA NO.222/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, ANNEXURE-C, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31-10-2012 IN ITA NO.222/BANG/2012 ANNEXURE-C, PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE, CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-12(1), BANGALORE.

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

JUDGMENT

Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Mr.Chythanya K.K., learned counsel for the respondent.

2.

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

3.

Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that the tax effect is less than `1 Crore and in

view of the aforesaid circular, the appeal is not maintainable.

4.

Accordingly, in view of the circular dated 08.08.2019, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →