COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PLUTO FINANCE PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/22/2013HC CalcuttaWBCHCO000420201314 December 2021Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. This was based on a submission by the Revenue that the appeal was hit by a CBDT circular due to low tax effect.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an ITAT order that granted relief to the assessee company. The appeal raised questions about the genuineness of share sale transactions resulting in a loss.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT erred in allowing relief without properly appreciating facts and the ratio of Supreme Court decisions, and whether a share sale resulting in loss was genuine solely because purchasers also sold at a loss.

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(2)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.

OD-2 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA/22/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II, KOLKATA Vs M/S. PLUTO FINANCE PVT. LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : December 14, 2021. Appearance: Mr. Manabendra Nath Bandyopadhyay, Adv. … for the appellant. Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta, Adv. … for the respondent. The Court : This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the order dated 23rd May, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 596/Kol/2011 for the assessment year 2007-08. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in allowing complete relief to the Assessee Company without considering and properly appreciating the relevant facts of the case in the light of the ratio of the relevant decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Medowell & Co.

2 Ltd. Vs. CTO Reported in 154 ITR 148 and CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More Reported in 82 ITR 540? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in holding that the transaction of sale of shares by the Assessee Company, which ultimately resulted in loss, was genuine merely because the purchasers subsequently disposed off the shares at a loss? We have heard Mr. Manabendra Nath Bandyopadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Revenue and Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. The learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue submitted that this appeal is hit by the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on account of low tax effect. Recording such submission, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. Consequently, substantial questions of law are left open. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) As/RS

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →