THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MR H S VIJAYA KUMAR

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR I.T.A. No.385 OF 2007 BETWEEN:- 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, C.R. Building, 55/1, Shilpashree, Vidhyaranya Complex, Vishveshwaranagar, Mysore-570008. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Hassan. Appellants (By Sri K.V. Aravind, Advocate) AND:- Mr. H.S. Vijaya Kumar, Prop. Chowdeswari Service Station, B.M. Road, Channarayapatna, Hassan District, Hassan – 573116. Respondent (By Sri A. Shankar & Sri M. Lava, Advocates)

2 This I.T.A. is filed U/s.260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 28.11.2006 passed in I.T.A.No.108/Bang/2005 for the Assessment Year 1999-00, praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to (i) formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein and (ii) allow the appeal and set-aside the order of the ITAT, Bangalore in ITA No.108/Bang/2005 dated 28.11.2006 confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity. This appeal is coming on for final hearing this day, SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following: J U D G M E N T It is the contention of the appellants that on the basis of the monetary limit as per Circular No.2/05 the appeal is not maintainable. The case falls within exception mentioned in the circular wherein the appeal is permitted to be filed if it involves a question of recurring in nature and cascading effect on the other similar matters. The question whether Circular 3/11 which prescribes the revised monetary limit is prospective or retrospective, is a matter to be decided in the appeal contemplated to be filed by the appellant. In view of the decision of this Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. RANKA AND RANKA 72 DTR 270, the

3 appeal is disposed of. The Appellants submit that they have been given instructions to file SLP against the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ranka & Rank. In the event the Supreme Court were to hold that Circular has only prospective effect, the appellant is given liberty to file memo and revive the appeal for disposal. Accordingly, for the present, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE NM*