Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2016
:PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K. PATIL
AND
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S. SUJATHA
I.T.A.Nos.534-535 OF 2014 Between:
Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Mangalore. …Appellants (By Sri. Jeevan.J. Neeralgi, Advocate)
And :
M/s. New Mangalore Port Trust, Panambur, PAN: AAALN0057A.
…Respondent
(By Sri. A. Shankar and Sri. M. Lava, Advocates) *** These ITAs are filed U/s. 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, praying to formulate the substantial question of law, allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, in ITA No. 565/Bang/2013 & Cross Objection No.67/Bang/2014 dated 04/07/2014 for the assessment year 2008-2009, confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the
order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangaluru.
These ITAs coming on for Admission, this day, N.K.PATIL J., delivered the following: :J U D G M E N T:
These appeals by the Revenue are arising out of the impugned order dated 04/07/2014, passed in ITA No.565/Bang/2013, by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench-C, Bangalore, for considering the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessment order passed on 29.12.2009 has got merged with the order dated 27.05.2011 when the latter order was only giving effect to the order passed by CIT under section 264 and it modified the previous order to that extent only and hence the original assessment order cannot be said to have last its identity?
(ii) Whether Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in quashing the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s. 263 of the Act which is as per law as the provisions of Sec. 14A are applicable to the total income under the Income Tax Act and the fact whether the income of the assessee is computed as per Sec. 11 or not is of no relevance? (iii) Whether Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in holding that the condition for disallowance
u/s. 14A had not been complied with when the assessment order under section 143(3) failed to consider the provisions of Sec.14A and hence it was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue? (iv) Whether Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in holding that since original order was passed by the assessing officer after conducting elaborate enquiries, it would have reasonably been presumed that he would have applied his mind to the applicability of the provisions of Sec. 14A of the Act when there is nothing on the record to show that the issue has been considered by the assessing officer?
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for appellants and learned counsel appearing for respondent. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent, at the outset submitted, that in the light of the Circular dated 10th December 2015 bearing No.21/2015 and since the subject matter involved in these cases is less than Rs.20/- Lakhs, the instant appeals are liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for appellants, has not disputed the position of law and he
fairly submitted that, in the light of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for respondent and in the light of the Circular dated 10th December 2015 bearing No.21/2015, these appeals may be disposed of as not maintainable. 4. The above submission made by learned counsel for both the parties is placed on record. 5. In view of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for both the parties and in the light of the Circular dated 10th December 2015 bearing No.21/2015, instant appeals filed by the appellants are dismissed as not maintainable. Ordered accordingly.
SD/- JUDGE
SD/-
JUDGE tsn*