The Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore/The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1, Udupi v. Deepa S. Pai
[Citation -2020-LL-0120-59]

Metadata

Citation 2020-LL-0120-59
Appellant Name The Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore/The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1, Udupi
Respondent Name Deepa S. Pai
Court HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 20/01/2020
Assessment Year 2004-05
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags monetary limit • tax effect
Bot Summary: Mr.S.Parthasarathi, learned counsel for the respondent. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been filed by the assessee. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that the amount involved in this appeal is 90,57,063/- which is below the monetary limit of 1 Crore. At this stage, learned counsel for the revenue has filed a memo in which it is stated that if the notional 3 tax effect for future years on the basis of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is taken into consideration, the amount is more than 1 Crore. As per the circular dated 08.08.2019, the notational tax effect is not required to be taken into account. The aforesaid memo of calculation is of no assistance to the revenue in this appeal. In the result, we hold that this appeal is not maintainable in view of the instructions dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

Judgment



IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 PRESENT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI I.T.A. NO.147 OF 2009 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C.R. BUILDING, ATTAVARA MANGALORE. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, UDUPI. APPELLANTS (By Sri. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.) AND: MS. DEEPA S. PAI NO.5, CHITRAKALA ANANTHANAGAR MANIPAL-576104. RESPONDENT (By Sri. S. PARTHASARATHI, ADV.) THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 24-11-2008 PASSED IN ITA NO.334/BNG/2008, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, PRAYING TO FORMULATE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN. ALLOW APPEAL 2 AND SET ASIDE ORDER PASSED BY ITAT BANGALORE BENCH IN ITA NO.334/BNG/2008, DATED 24-11-2008 CONFIRM ORDERS OF APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM ORDER PASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER IN INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for appellants. Mr.S.Parthasarathi, learned counsel for respondent. 2. This appeal under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act , for short) has been filed by assessee. 3. After hearing learned counsel for parties, it is evident that amount involved in this appeal is 90,57,063/- which is below monetary limit of 1 Crore. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for revenue has filed memo in which it is stated that if notional 3 tax effect for future years on basis of order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is taken into consideration, amount is more than 1 Crore. 5. However, as per circular dated 08.08.2019, notational tax effect is not required to be taken into account. Therefore, aforesaid memo of calculation is of no assistance to revenue in this appeal. 6. In result, we hold that this appeal is not maintainable in view of instructions dated 08.08.2019 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes Accordingly, appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore/The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1, Udupi v. Deepa S. Pai
Report Error