THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS) vs. SHRI KSHATRIYA GHANCHI SAMAJ SANGHATANA
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found that no substantial questions of law arose in the present appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an order passed by the ITAT, Panaji Bench. The Revenue's counsel stated that the matter was covered by a previous decision of the High Court.
What were the issues?
Whether substantial questions of law arise from the ITAT's order, warranting an appeal to the High Court.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2016
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA ITA NO.108/2016
BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS) MANGALORE. ... APPELLANT
(By SRI. E. I. SANMATHI, ADV.)
AND:
SHRI. KSHATRIYA GHANCHI SAMAJ SANGHATANA, BHATI HOUSE, #2212/B, KODIBAG KARWAR, UTTARKANNADA – 581 303, PAN NO:AAMTS7180D. ... RESPONDENT
(NOTICE NOT ORDERED IN R/O RESPONDENT)
2 THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 10/06/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.100/PNJ/2014 PRAYING 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 10.06.2015 PASSED BY THE ITAT, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE’S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN ITA NO.100/PNJ/2014 & GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Sri. E.I. Sanmathi, learned counsel for the appellant-Revenue states that the matter is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Meenakshi Amma Endowment Trust in ITA No.152/2010 dated 10.11.2010.
Under the circumstances, we do not find that any substantial questions of law would arise.
Hence, the present appeal is dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE
SD/- JUDGE
PMR/-
More judgments on Section 260-A
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026