PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V vs. M/S. RAJEEV GANDHI RURAL HOUSING

PDF · subscribers
ITA/574/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01051893201705 November 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,BELLUNKE A.S3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the Revenue's submission that the substantial questions of law were covered by a previous judgment of the same court. The appeal was disposed of based on this submission.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The Revenue's counsel restricted their submissions to specific substantial questions of law.

What were the issues?

Whether the substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue were covered by existing High Court precedent. The appeal was disposed of on the basis of this issue.

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 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BELLUNKE

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.574 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU -560 095.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5(1)(1) BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI: SANMATHI E I, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S. RAJEEV GANDHI RURAL HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED 4TH FLOOR, KHB COMPLEX CAUVERY BHAVAN, K G ROAD BENGALURU -560 009 PAN: AABCR5689N. ... RESPONDENT

2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 08.03.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO.204/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012- 13, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 08.03.2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'C' BENCH, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.204/BANG/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL; AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

*****

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The learned Counsel for the appellants submit that the first substantial question of law does not arise for consideration. Hence, he restricts his submission only so far as substantial question of law Nos.2 and 3. He contends that the second and third substantial questions of law are covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER VS.

3 KARNATAKA URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCE CORPORATION in ITA No.2418 of 2005 disposed off on 21.02.2006 reported in 284 ITR page 582. Hence, he pleads that the appeal be disposed off.

2.

The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is placed on record.

The appeal is accordingly disposed off.

SD/-

SD/- JUDGE

JUDGE

*bgn/-

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 →