1 IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8205-8214 OF 2009 M/S. S.C. NAREGAL Appellant(s) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HUBLI & ANR. Respondent(s) ORDER Heard learned counsel for parties. These appeals take exception to judgment dated 23.09.2008 passed by High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Dharwad in ITA Nos. 362-370 of 2004 and ITA No. 372 of 2004 pertaining to particular assessment years. issue before High Court was whether Instruction Order No. 5/2008 dated 15.05.2008 could be availed by appellant(s), providing for disposal of appeal(s) involving low tax effect. High Court has gone by Clauses 8 and 11 of said Instruction. Indeed, Clause 11 of Instruction does mention that where appeals have been filed before 15.05.2008, will be Signature Not Verified governed by instructions on this subject, operative at time Digitally signed by DEEPAK SINGH Date: 2019.10.24 17:29:15 IST Reason: when such appeal was filed. 2 Similar question came up for consideration before this Court in Director of Income Tax, Circle 26(1), New Delhi vs. S.R.M.B. Dairy Farming (P) Ltd., reported in (2018) 13 SCC 239. This Court after considering decisions of different High Courts, including Supreme Court decision on question involved, namely, Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Surya Herbal Ltd. reported in (2011) 15 SCC 482 answered question in favour of assessee in following words: 23. We are of view that matter needs to be put to rest and clarity be obtained in view of impact of this issue on pending cases before High Courts as well as cases which have been disposed of by various High Courts by applying Circular of 2011 to pending litigations. In our view matter has been squarely put to rest taking further care of interest of Revenue by order passed by three-Judge Bench of this Court in Surya Herbal Ltd. Case, which had put two caveats even to retrospective application of Circular. subsequent orders have been passed by two-Judge Bench without those orders being brought to notice of Court, duty which was cast on Department to have done so to avail ambiguity which has arisen. Thus, said view of three-Judge Bench would hold water and Circular would apply even to pending matters but subject to two caveats provided in Surya Herbal Ltd. case. same interpretation must apply to instructions under consideration. In present case, neither there is possibility of cascading effect or issue involved in group of matters as such. Therefore, appeals are allowed. 3 As result, appeals filed by Department before High Court stands dismissed because of low tax effect, leaving question of law open. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ...................J (A.M. KHANWILKAR) ...................J (DINESH MAHESHWARI) New Delhi October 23, 2019 4 ITEM NO.104 COURT NO.8 SECTION IV-A SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 8205-8214/2009 M/S. S.C. NAREGAL Appellant(s) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HUBLI & ANR. Respondent(s) ([ AT TOP ] ) Date : 23-10-2019 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI For Appellant(s) Mr. Senthil Jagadeesan, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR Mr. ANS Nadkarni, ASG Ms. Pinki Anand, ASG Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Baroona Gautam, Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, Adv. Mr. Amit Verma, Adv. Mr. Adit Khorana, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR UPON hearing counsel Court made following ORDER (DEEPAK SINGH) (VIDYA NEGI) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) S.C. Naregal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hubli & Anr