COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR L
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found no substantial question of law arose for determination. The appeal was dismissed based on the parties' joint submission and a prior ruling.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order concerning the assessment year 2008-2009. Both parties agreed that the issue was covered by a previous High Court decision.
What were the issues?
Whether a substantial question of law arises for determination in the appeal, given it is covered by a previous High Court judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory2,590 citing359 ITR 565 · 2013 · HC · Read judgment
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015 PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
I.T.A.NO.265 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R.BUILDING BANGALORE.
INCOME TAX OFFICER
WARD-6(3)
BANGALORE.
... APPELLANTS
[BY:SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE]
AND:
SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR.L PAN: ADAPN1898A NO.431, SONNAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE, BETTAHALSUR POST JALA HOBLI, NORTH TALUK BANGALORE-562157
... RESPONDENT
[BY:SRI A.SHANKAR & SRI M.LAVA, ADVOCATES]
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:12/12/2014 PASSED IN ITA NO.1425/BANG/2013,
2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 WITH A PRAYER TO (1) 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 (2) SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 12/12/2014 PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. ITA NO. 1425/BNG/2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009, AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL.
THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, VINEET SARAN.J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for appellants as well as Sri A.Shankar and Sri M.Lava for respondent – assessee and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the parties have jointly stated that the question involved in this appeal is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax –vs- Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory, (2013) 359 ITR 565, wherein, the question has been decided in favour of assessee and against the appellant – revenue.
3 3. As such, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
VGR
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 →- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026