THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BIOCON LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/455/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01040844201531 October 2019Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the submission by the Revenue's counsel regarding the appeal not being maintainable due to monetary limits. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. 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 prescribed monetary limits for such appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

ON THE 31ST 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.455 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, JSS TOWERS, BSK III STAGE BENGALURU-560 085.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, JSS TOWERS, BSK III STAGE BENGALURU-560 085. ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI: DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI: K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S. BIOCON LIMITED 20TH KM, HOSUR ROAD ELECTRONIC CITY HEBBAGODI, BENGALURU-560 100. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI: T. SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE)

2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 20.03.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.543/BANG/2014, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003- 2004, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE; ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.543/BANG/2014 DATED 20.03.2015 CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BENGALURU.

*****

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.

3 2. In view of the submission made, the appeal is dismissed as such.

Sd/-

Sd/- JUDGE

JUDGE

*bgn/-

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 →