Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2012 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SREEDHAR RAO AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.V.PINTO
INCOME-TAX APPEAL NO.690 OF 2007
BETWEEN
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADV.) AND
MRS P JAYASHREE 206/207 SHELTER APARTMENTS PALM GROVE ROAD VICTORIA LAYOUT BANGALORE- 560 025
... RESPONDENT
(BY M/S. HOLLA & HOLLA.)
THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29-03-2007 PASSED IN
2 ITA NO.1132/BANG/2005 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96, PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:
I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE
IN ITA NO.1132/BANG/2005 DATED 29-03-2007 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER & CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(1), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS ITA IS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, SREEDHAR RAO J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T
The mandatory limit in this appeal is less than Rs.10 lakhs. This Court in the case of CIT Vs. RANKA AND RANKA in 72 DTR 270 (KAR), has held that the Circular No.3/2011 which prescribes the mandatory limits of Rs.10 lakhs for filing appeal by the Revenue applies to pending appeal and also has prospective effect. Thus, rejected the contention of the Revenue on the ground that the said Circular has only prospective effect and does not apply to pending appeals. The Revenue has preferred SLP before the Supreme Court in
3 SLP No.27468/2012 pending decision. In view of the decision of the Court in Ranka and Ranka case, the appeal is to be dismissed on the ground of mandatory limit. If the Revenue succeeds in the SLP pending before the Supreme Court, the appellants are at liberty to make an application for revival of the appeal for disposal on merits. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE
nvj