THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S BIOCON LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/438/2014HC KarnatakaKAHC01034922201419 October 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal with liberty granted to the revenue to revive it. This was based on the assessee's submission regarding the tax effect and the binding nature of the CBDT circular.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against an ITAT order. The assessee's counsel argued that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, making the appeal not maintainable. The revenue sought liberty to revive the appeal if exceptions applied.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is maintainable in light of the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for appeals, and whether the revenue can be granted liberty to revive the appeal.

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 BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.438 OF 2014 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

LTU, JSS TOWERS

BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

LTU, JSS TOWERS

BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE-560085.

... APPELLANTS (BY Mr. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: M/S. BIOCON LTD., 20TH KM HOSUR ROAD ELECTRONIC CITY HEBBAGODI, BANGALORE-560100. ... RESPONDENT (BY Ms. MANASA ANANTHAN, FOR Mr. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30-04-2014

2 PASSED IN ITA NO.371/BANG/2010, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.371/BANG/2010 DATED 30-04-2014 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-11(2), BANGALORE. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue has entered appearance through video conferencing. Smt.Manasa Ananthan, learned counsel for Mr.T.Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the assessee. 2. Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.1 Crore and therefore, the appeal should not be entertained at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue.

3 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the matter falls within the exceptions under the aforesaid Circular dated 08.08.2019. 4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV

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 →