PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. SRI. C. RAMAKRISHNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/349/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01049902201505 April 2016Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the submission of the Revenue's counsel. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of without delving into the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the ITAT. The counsel for the Revenue submitted that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether a substantial question of law arises from the ITAT's order for the High Court to consider.

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

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2016

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA ITA NO.349/2015 BETWEEN:

1.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1),

BANGALORE.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI.C.RAMAKRISHNA NO.827, 7TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, BSK 3RD STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 3RD PHASE, BANGALORE-85, PAN ADVPR 6480M

...RESPONDENT

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:31/10/2014 PASSED IN ITA NO.657/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010 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: 31/10/2014 PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'B' BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. ITA NO. 657/BANG/2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL, AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned Counsel for the appellants submits that no substantial question of law would arise for consideration in the present appeal.

2.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

3.

The disposal of the present appeal shall not come in the way of consideration of ITA Nos.347/2015 and 348/2015.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

JT/-

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 →