THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the appeal was not maintainable based on the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The Revenue's counsel conceded that the tax effect of the appeal was less than Rs. 1.00 Crore.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal before the High Court due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENGALURU IN ITA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA I.T.A.No. 172 of 2022
BETWEEN:
THE Pr. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX
CENTRAL CIRCLE,
C R BUILDING,
QUEEN'S ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2)
C R BUILDING,
QUEEN'S ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001 ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI ARAVIND K.V., ADVOCATE)
AND
M/s. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BENGALURU-560025 PAN AABCG 8889P
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI BALRAM R RAO, ADVOCATE)
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 28/10/2020 PASSED IN ITA No.1427/BANG/2017, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 PRAYING TO ; i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN. ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 1427/BANG/2017 DATED 28/10/2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 ANNEXURE-C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU. iii) TO PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION through physical hearing/video conferencing, THIS DAY P.S. DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri K V Aravind, learned advocate appearing for the appellants, in his usual fairness, submits that the Tax Effect is less than Rs.1.00 Crore and hence, the appeal is not maintainable.
In view of the aforesaid submission and based on the Circular No.17/2019, dated 8th August, 2019 of Central Board of Direct Taxes, the appeal is not maintainable and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
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 →- Mrs. Aqsa Begum vs. Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026