THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S MUDDUKRISHNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/350/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01050265200712 November 2013Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that based on its previous judgment in Ranka and Ranka, appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10 lakhs are not maintainable, even if filed before the relevant CBDT instruction. The court dismissed the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the ITAT concerning the Assessment Year 2001-02. The net tax effect of the appeal was less than Rs. 10 lakhs.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal based on the tax effect, considering the retrospective application of CBDT instructions.

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 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.350 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

1.

The Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, C.R. Building, Queens Road, Bangalore.

2.

The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), C. R Building, Queens Road, Bangalore.

.. APPELLANTS

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

AND:

Mr. S. Muddukrishna, Prop: Mysolite Products, C-12, Veerasandra Industrial Estate, Hosur Road, Bangalore-560 002 ..RESPONDENT

(By Sri.A. Shankar, Adv.)

- - - 2 - This appeal is filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 28-09-2006 passed in ITA No. 14/BANG/2006 for the Assessment Year 2001-02, praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

i. formulate the substantial questions of law sated therein,

ii. allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT, Bangalore in ITA No.14/BANG/2006 dated 28- 09-2006 confirming the order of passed by the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity.

This Appeal coming on for hearing this day, KUMAR J., delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

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

- - - 3 - February 2011 and 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

KNM/-

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 →