PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 vs. M/S. UB INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LTD.,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. This was based on a submission by the Revenue's counsel regarding monetary limits prescribed by a CBDT circular.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal before the High Court due to the monetary limits stipulated in a CBDT circular.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ON THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.556 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU .
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU. ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)
AND: M/S. UB INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LIMITED UB TOWERS, LEVEL 12, UB CITY, NO.24, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.R. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE AND SMT. GIRIJA G.P., ADVOCATE)
2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31.03.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO.1210/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO 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 AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 31.03.2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, BENGALURU AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT- ASSESSEE’S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN ITA NO.1210/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010- 2011 AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
*****
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the appellants submit that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the monetary limits in terms of Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 passed by Director (ITJ), Central Board Direct Taxes, New Delhi.
In view of the submission made, the appeal is dismissed as such.
Sd/-
Sd/- JUDGE
JUDGE
More judgments on Section 260-A
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026