THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI A K PRASHANTH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/103/2010HC KarnatakaKAHC01027520201005 January 2016Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal following the CBDT circular which stipulated that appeals with a subject matter below Rs. 20 lakhs are not maintainable. The Revenue did not dispute this submission.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an ITAT order that held a reassessment order to be without jurisdiction. The respondent argued that the appeal was not maintainable as the subject matter was less than Rs. 20 lakhs, citing a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the High Court appeal is maintainable given the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular, and the correctness of the ITAT's finding on the jurisdiction of the reassessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 124(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N K PATIL

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA

ITA NO.103/2010

BETWEEN

1.

The Commissioner of Income-tax

Park View Building

No.284/1, 4TH Main

P J Extension, Davanagere-577002

2.

The Income-tax Officer

Ward-2 , Park View Building

No.284/1, 4TH Main

P J Extension Davanagere-577002 …Appellants

(By Sri K.V.Aravind, Advocate)

AND

Shri A.K.Prashanth M/s. Athani Brothers Industries Bamboo Bazar, Davanagere. ….Respondent

(By Sri Chythanya K.K, Advocate)

This Income-tax appeal is filed under Section 260-A of Income-tax Act 1961, to set aside the order passed by the ITAT, Bangalore in ITA No.987/Bang/2008 dated 30.10.2009 and confirm the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax Officer, ward-2, Davanagere, in the interest of justice and equity.

This appeal coming on for Hearing this day, N. K. Patil. J., delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the revenue questioning the correctness of the order dated 30.10.2009 passed in ITA No.987/Bang/2008 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore and confirm the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (A), Hubli and the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward-2, Davanagere to consider the following substantial question of law. ‘Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the notice and reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is without jurisdiction as the same vested with ACIT/DCIT when such a objection had not been raised within one month as required u/s.124(3) of the Act?

2.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3.

At the outset, learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that in view of the Circular bearing No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, since the subject matter

3 is less than Rs.20 lakhs, the appeal is not maintainable before this Court. Therefore the appeal may be disposed of.

4.

In reply, learned Counsel for the appellants has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent.

5.

Submission of learned counsel for the parties is placed on record.

6.

This appeal is disposed of, following the circular bearing No.21/2015, F.No.279/Misc.142/2007- ITI (Pt) issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes dated 10.12.2015. Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

brn

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 →