THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI VIVEK JAIRAZBHOY

PDF · subscribers
ITA/166/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01021313201331 March 2016Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court took the CBDT circular on record and disposed of the appeal. The appeal was disposed of as not pressed by the Revenue.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 20 lakhs. The Revenue's counsel stated that the appeal was not to be pressed in view of a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be pressed given the tax effect and the CBDT circular.

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 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2016

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA INCOME TAX APPEAL No.166/2013

BETWEEN:

1.

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE

2.

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE-2 RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE

... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, STANDING COUNSEL)

2 AND:

SHRI VIVEK JAIRAZBHOY NO.17/2, MILLERS ROAD BANGALORE – 560046.

...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.A.SHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED: 14/12/2012 PASSED IN ITA NO.236/BANG/2012, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.236/BANG/2012 DATED 14/12/2012 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, BANGALORE.

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

JUDGMENT

As such, the appeal is admitted. However, learned counsel appearing for appellant-Revenue Mr.Aravind states, as the tax effect in the present appeal is less than Rs.20 lakhs though the amount is wrongly mentioned in the memorandum of appeal. Further he states that the present appeal is not to be pressed in view of Circular of CBDT dated 10.12.2015.

2.

The said circular is taken on record.

3.

The appeal is disposed of as not pressed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

Sk/-

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 →