THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT U LAKSHMI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/814/2008HC KarnatakaKAHC01036528200818 December 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,K.NATARAJAN3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. This was based on the submission made by the appellants regarding monetary limits and Circular No. 3 of 2018.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax filed an appeal before the High Court. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal before the High Court due to monetary limits and 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 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.814 OF 2008

BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C. R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1), BENGALURU.

... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI K. V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. U. LAKSHMI LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF T. V. UMESH GUPTA, 28/D, 37TH CROSS, 8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU. ... RESPONDENT

2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW; ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU BENCH, IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.653/BANG/2007 DATED 11.03.2008 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1), BENGALURU AND ETC.

*****

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS 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 and also in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, passed by Director (ITJ), Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi.

2.

In view of the submission made, the appeal is 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 →