THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI THIMMARAYA SHETTY

PDF · subscribers
ITA/802/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01059426200717 December 2013Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not maintainable in view of a previous judgment of the same court regarding the tax effect limit for appeals. Liberty was reserved for the Revenue to seek revival if the Supreme Court reverses the earlier judgment.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The net tax effect in this appeal was Rs. 6,05,880/-, which was less than Rs. 10 lakhs.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal based on the net tax effect, considering CBDT instructions and previous High Court rulings.

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 BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013 P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KUMAR A N D THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.802 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, ATTAVAR, MANGALORE.

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INVESTIGATION CIRCLE, MANGALORE.

... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. E. SANMATHI INDRAKUMAR, ADV.)

AND:

SRI THIMMARAYA SHETTY, ‘PANCHADURGA’, PADUKONAJE, MOODABIDRI

...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI A. SHANKAR, ADV.)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 19-02- 2007 PASSED IN ITA NO.1448/BNG/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000, PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:

- 2 -

I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN,

II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE BENCH-A IN ITA NO.1448/BNG/2004 DATED 19-02-2007 & CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE, MANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL IS 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, the net tax effect in this appeal is Rs.6,05,880/- which 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

nvj

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 →