THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS vs. M/S MEDI ASSIST INDIA TPA PRIVATE LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
RP/152/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01019405202110 December 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 2 Crores, making it not maintainable under CBDT Circular No. 09/2024. The appeal was disposed of with liberty to revive if exceptions applied.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that deleted a disallowance of expenses. The ITAT held that the expenses were covered by a surrender made by the assessee. The Revenue questioned whether the Tribunal's order was perverse.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT's order deleting the disallowance of expenses was perverse, considering the nature of the surrender made by the assessee. The maintainability of the appeal due to tax effect was also a key consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39399-DB ITA No. 152 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 152 OF 2021 BETWEEN:

1.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560001

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI N.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S BHAKTA MARKANDESHWARA MINERALS DOOR NO 93, 3RD CROSS, WEAVERS CO OPERATIVE COLONY, HOSPET, KARNATAKA 583201 …RESPONDENT

THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 1891/BANG/2017 DATED 31/07/2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010- 2011 ANNEXURE-C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39399-DB ITA No. 152 of 2021

COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BENGALURU AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

Heard the learned counsel Sri Sushal Tiwari, for appellants/Revenue.

2.

The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) questioning the correctness and legality of order dated 31.7.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.1891/Bang/2017 for the assessment year 2010-11, raising the following substantial questions of law: “1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in deleting the disallowance of expenses claimed to the tune of Rs.3,36,52,141/- by holding that same is covered in Rs.4 Crores surrendered by assessee vide letter dated 28.03.2011 when the assessee has not

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39399-DB ITA No. 152 of 2021

made any admission of undisclosed income in the hands of K.Mahesh Kumar and that is subject to appeal"? 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in directing the assessing authority to delete the disallowance of expenses holding that the disallowance is under the 'surrender of Rs.4 crores made in the hands of the assessee, the letter dated 28/3/2011', ignoring that no such surrender or admission of income has been made by the assessee-firm in any of the Assessment Year and the said letter of the assessee is the surrender of income in the case of Shri.Mahesh Kumar (who is a key person in the firm) and that is also subject of appeal"?”

3.

It is noticed that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal would not be maintainable at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the matter falls within the exceptions under

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:39399-DB ITA No. 152 of 2021

the aforesaid Circular dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024.

5.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue. However, the question of law is kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

ND List No.: 3 Sl No.: 13

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 →