TGHE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE NATIONAL WELFARE URBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/100016/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC02009310202418 August 2025Bench: S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV,VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty to the Revenue to revive it if exceptions under the relevant CBDT circulars apply. The substantial questions of law were kept open.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an ITAT order concerning assessment year 2017-18. The Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal as the tax effect was below the monetary limit specified in a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be withdrawn based on a CBDT circular regarding monetary limits. The underlying issue involved the genuineness of cash transactions and deposits of specified bank notes.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10328-DB ITA No. 100016 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.100016 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, C.R. BUILDING, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI 580025.

2.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1 (1). C.R. BUILDING, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI 580025. - APPELLANTS (BY SRI. M. THIRUMALESH AND SMT. ROOPA ANAVEKAR, ADVOCATES)

AND: THE NATIONAL WELFARE URBAN CO-OP, CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., J.M. ARCADE, LINE BAZAAR, DHARWAD 580001, KARNATAKA. PAN: AAEAT9679F. - RESPONDENT

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN I.T.A. NO. 666/BANG/2023 DATED 30.11.2023 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 (ANNEXURE A) AND THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER (ANNEXURE-C), ON THIS ISSUE AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HUBBALLI & ETC.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL

Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10328-DB ITA No. 100016 of 2024

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV)

The appeal has been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act challenging the order passed in I.T.A. No. 666/Bang/2023 relating to assessment year 2017-18. It is noticed that the tax effect in the appeal in terms of the circular dated 17.09.2024 is below Rs. 2 crores.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo which reads as under: “That the appellants have filed the above mentioned appeal challenging the ITAT order dated 30.11.2023. As per the CBDT Circular dated 17.09.2024 the matter falls under the Below Monetary Limit, i.e., 2 crore and the tax effect is less than 2 crore. Therefore, the above appeal needs to be withdrawn as per the Circular.”

3.

The substantial questions of law raised are as follows: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding the Cash transitions and

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10328-DB ITA No. 100016 of 2024

deposit of Specified bank Notes, done after specified date, in violation of Government of India Gazette Notification No.2652, can be called a genuine transaction and delete addition made u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act?

2.

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding the identity and creditworthiness is established just because a list of such members of the Assessee Society is provided without PAN and KYC documents?

3.

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that it was genuine transaction although it has been proved that such pigmy deposit and repayment of loan was immediately due to the Assessee Society, during the normal course of its business operations?

4.

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct, without appreciating that whatever is illegal as per one law cannot be legal as per any other law as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Apex Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. 135 taxmann.com 286?

4.

Copy of the circular dated 17.09.2024 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes is enclosed. In the light of the

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10328-DB ITA No. 100016 of 2024

subject matter of the appeal being below monetary limit in terms of the Circular, the proceedings cannot be continued. 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 17.09.2024 and Circular No. 5/2024 dated15.03.2024.

5.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed off with the liberty as prayed for by the revenue.

6.

The substantial questions of law raised above are kept open to be adjudicated in appropriate proceedings.

Sd/- (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE BVV, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →