THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KMG INFOTECH PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/105/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01007461201307 September 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 to the Revenue to revive it if the tax effect was found to be above the prescribed threshold. This was based on the submissions made by both parties regarding the tax effect.

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 for maintainability as per a circular. The Revenue disputed this but sought liberty to revive the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal based on the tax effect, as per the CBDT circular. The court considered the arguments on tax effect and the liberty to revive.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

I.T.A. NO.105 OF 2013

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, ADV.)

AND:

KMG INFOTECH PVT, LTD., UNIT NO.201/202 VANGUARD RISE NO.163 KONENA AGRAHARA OFF AIRPORT ROAD BANGALORE-560017. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) - - -

THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31-10-2012

PASSED IN ITA NO.70/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.70/BANG/2012 DATED 31/10/2012 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(5), 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. 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 `1 Crore and therefore, the appeal may not be maintainable in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019.

3.

The aforesaid submission is disputed by the learned counsel for the appellants. He further submits

that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the tax effect is more than `1 Crore.

4.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the revenue to revive this appeal in case the tax effect is more than `1 Crore.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

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 →