PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MARVEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/274/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01051872201705 November 2018Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,BELLUNKE A.S3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The appellants' counsel submitted that the substantial questions of law were covered by Supreme Court and High Court judgments. Based on this submission, the appeal was disposed of.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department appealed an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

Whether the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal are covered by existing judicial precedents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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.274 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU.

2.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 12(1), BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI: SANMATHI E I, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S MARVEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED NO 23, AIRPORT ROAD, 2ND FLOOR LEELA GALLERIA BENGALURU – 560 008 PAN : AAECM5559R.

... RESPONDENT

2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 17.06.2016 PASSED IN IT[TP]A NO. 431/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011, VIDE ANNEXURE-A 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 17.06.2016 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE'S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN IT[TP]A NO.431/BANG/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND 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 that arises for consideration in the instant appeal is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-III VS. HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD., (2018) 93 TAXMANN.COM 33 (SC)

3 and second and third substantial questions of law is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU VS. SOFTBRANDS INDIA (P) LTD., (2018) 94 TAXMANN.COM 426 (KARNATAKA). Hence, he pleads that the present appeal be dismissed.

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 →