1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2014 PRESENT HON BLE Mr. JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND HON BLE Mrs. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA I.T.A. No. 555/2008 & I.T.A. CROB. No. 7/2009 I.T.A. No. 555/2008 BETWEEN : 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. 2. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (2) C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. APPELLANTS (BY Sri. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.) 2 AND :M/S. VIJAYALAKSHMI PLY INDUSTRIES No. 49, JIGANI INDUSTRIAL AREA, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE DIST. RESPONDENT (BY Sri. A. SHANKAR & M. LAVA, ADVS.) THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.12.2007 PASSED IN IT(SS)A No. 50/BNG/2006 AND CROSS OBJECTION No. 19/BANG/2007 FOR BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEAR 01.04.1996 TO 03.04.2002 PRAYING TO FORMULATE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND ETC. I.T.A. CROB. No. 7/2009 BETWEEN : M/S. VIJAYALAXMI PLY INDUSTRIES REP. BY ITS PARTNER DINESH KUMAR R PATEL No. 49, JIGANI INDUSTRIAL AREA, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE. CROSS OBJECTOR (BY Sri. A. SHANKAR AND M. LAVA, ADVS.) 3 AND : 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 560 001. 2. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (2) C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 560 001. RESPONDENTS (BY Sri. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.) THIS I.T.A. CROB. IS FILED U/O XLII RULE 1 R/W. O. XLI RULE 22 OF CPC ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN CROSS OBJECTION No. 19/BANG/2007 DATED 07.12.2007 FOR BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEAR 01.04.1996 TO 03.04.2002 PRAYING TO FORMULATE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND ETC. THIS I.T.A. AND I.T.A. CROB. COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, N. KUMAR, J, DELIVERED FOLLOWING; JUDGMENT This is appeal by Revenue challenging order passed by Tribunal. net tax effect in this appeal is Rs.3,68,117/-. In 4 view of circular No. 2/2005 dated 24.10.2005, no appeal lies where net tax effect is less than Rs.4.00 lakhs. Therefore, appeal is not maintainable. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed. 2. As held by this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jyoti Kumari (344 ITR 60), cross-objection is not maintainable. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE. Sd/- JUDGE. LRS. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Bangalore / Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore v. Vijayalakshmi Ply Industrie