THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. SUN MICROSYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/821/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01058538200718 December 2013Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal, following its own prior judgment which held that CBDT instructions regarding monetary limits for appeals were retrospective. The court noted that the Revenue had appealed this prior judgment to the Supreme Court.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order confirming an assessment. The net tax effect of the appeal was less than Rs. 10 lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the CBDT instructions on monetary limits for appeals are retrospective and applicable to pending appeals. Maintainability of the appeal given the tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 11 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF DECEMBER 2013

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

I.T.A. NO.821/2007

BETWEEN :

1.

The Commissioner of Income-tax,

Central Circle, C.R.Building, Queens Road, Bangalore.

2.

The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(2), C.R.Building, Queens Road, Bangalore. ...APPELLANTS

(By Sri.K.V.Aravind, Adv.)

AND :

M/s. Sun Microsystems India Pvt. Ltd., 6th Floor, Divyashree Chambers, Longford Road, Bangalore-560 025. …RESPONDENT

(By Sri.A.Shankar, Adv. for M/s.Universal Legal) . . . .

This I.T.A. is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 praying to (i) formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein, (ii) allow the

- 2 -

appeal and set-aside the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in I.T.A. No.1412/Bang/2005 dated 27.06.2007 confirming the order passed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity.

This I.T.A. coming on for hearing, this day, N.Kumar J., delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred by the Revenue, challenging the order passed by the Tribunal.

2.

The net tax effect, which is the subject matter of this appeal, is less than Rs.10 lakhs.

3.

In view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax & Another –vs- Ranka and Ranka reported in 2012(72) DTR (Kar) 270, wherein it was held that notwithstanding Clause 11 of CBDT Instruction No.3 of 2011 dated 9th February 2011, expressly providing that the instructions will apply to appeals filed on or after 9th February 2011 and

- 3 -

appeals filed earlier will be governed by contemporaneous instructions, the application of said instructions needs to be extended to appeals pending as on 9th February 2011. In other words, the said instruction was held to be retrospective. In view of the said instructions, this appeal preferred by the Revenue where the tax effect is less than Rs.10 lakhs, is not maintainable. However, it is submitted that the Revenue has preferred an appeal against the order of this Court before the Apex Court. Hence, in the event of the Apex Court reversing the said judgment, liberty is reserved to the Revenue to seek for revival of this appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

SPS

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →