COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MANIPAL FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/371/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01032134201307 November 2019Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court accepted the submission regarding the non-maintainability of the appeals. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed on this ground.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax against an order of the ITAT. The appellants' counsel submitted that the appeals were not maintainable due to monetary limits prescribed by a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the income tax appeals before the High Court based on the monetary limits stipulated in a CBDT circular.

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

ON THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.372 OF 2013 CONNECTED WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.371 OF 2013

IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.372 OF 2013:

BETWEEN:

1.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MANGALURU.

2.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1, UDUPI. ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND: M/S. MANIPAL FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED MANIPAL HOUSE, MANIPAL-576 104. …RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. SHEETAL BORKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI S. PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE)

2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 12.03.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.668/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 2009, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN; ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.668/BANG/2012 DATED 12.03.2013 AND ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (APPEALS), MYSURU DATED 21.03.2012 IN ITA NO.15/UDP/CIT(A) MNG/2010-2011.

IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.371 OF 2013:

BETWEEN:

1.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MANGALURU.

2.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1, UDUPI. ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND: M/S. MANIPAL FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED MANIPAL HOUSE, MANIPAL-576 104. …RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. SHEETAL BORKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI S. PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE)

3 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 12.03.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.667/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 2008, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN; ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.667/BANG/2012 DATED 12.03.2013 AND ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (APPEALS), MYSURU DATED 21.03.2012 IN ITA NO.12/UDP/CIT(A) MNG/2009-2010.

*****

THESE INCOME TAX APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellants submit that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the monetary limits in terms of Circular No.17 of 2019

4 dated 08.08.2019 passed by Director (ITJ), Central Board Direct Taxes, New Delhi.

2.

In view of the submission made, the appeals are dismissed as such.

Sd/-

Sd/- JUDGE

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 →