THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to the ITAT for reconsideration. This was based on a previous judgment where the Tribunal's order was set aside and the case was remitted for a decision on merits.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that confirmed the CIT(A)'s decision. The High Court had previously dealt with similar issues in a related appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether the ITAT had disposed of the appeal on a technical ground without considering the merits of the case, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JUNE 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA No.96/2010 BETWEEN: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE.
2 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(5) C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI: K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD SHAKTI BHAVAN, NO.32 RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI: A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE) THIS ITA FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE
2 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ARISE OUT OF ORDER DATED 9.10.2009 PASSED IN ITA NO.548/BNG/2006 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY the ITAT, BANGALORE, IN ITA NO.548/BNG/2006 DATED 9.10.2009 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R Mr.A.Shankar, learned counsel, takes notice for the respondent. Service is complete. 2. The appeal is taken up for disposal as requested by the learned counsel for the appellants and Sri.A.Shankar, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Mr.Aravind, learned standing counsel for the Department, submits that six questions involved in this appeal was examined by this Court and answered in ITA No.95/2010 as per the
3 judgment dated 22nd June 2011 and had allowed the appeal, after setting aside the order of the Tribunal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for re-consideration of the appeal as the Tribunal had disposed of the appeal only on a technical ground without going to the merits of the matter. 4. Sri.Shankar, learned counsel for the Revenue, does not dispute this fact and graciously submits that this matter can also be remanded to the Tribunal. 5. In the circumstances, the appeal is allowed and the questions are answered in terms of the judgment dated 22nd June 2011 passed in ITA No.95/2010 and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal. 6. Two weeks’ time is granted to
4 Sri.A.Shankar to file vakalath for the respondent in the Registry. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE KM
More judgments on Section 260-A
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026