THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S INTERGARDEN (INDIA) PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/566/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01046262201628 November 2017Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged the appellant's submission that the substantial questions of law were either not applicable or had been decided against them. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department appealed an order of the ITAT. The appellants' counsel conceded that some substantial questions of law did not arise and the remaining one was decided against them by a previous High Court ruling.

What were the issues?

Whether the substantial questions of law formulated in the appeal memorandum were valid and whether the ITAT's order was sustainable in light of previous High Court judgments.

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(1)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.

ITA No.566/2016

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.566/2016

BETWEEN :

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME-TAX, CIT(A)

5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA

BENGALURU – 560 095

2.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

CIRCLE-11(4), PRESENT ADDRESS

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WARD-3(1)(1), 2ND FLOOR

BMTC BUILDING

80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA

BENGALURU – 560 095

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

AND :

M/S. INTERGARDEN (INDIA) PVT. LTD. NO.68, OBALAPURA VILLAGE ANNGONDANAHALLI HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU – 560 067

...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI T.SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE)

ITA No.566/2016

-2-

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.03.2016 PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1292/BANG/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 2007.

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Ag.CJ (Oral):

Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants fairly submits that the second, third and fourth substantial questions of law formulated in the appeal memorandum do not arise for determination and the first substantial question of law is answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [(2012) 349 ITR 98 (Karn)]. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed. Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

KSR

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 →