1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 PRESENT HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA I.T.A. NO.16 OF 2011 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A) C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. 2. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-6(3), MUMBAI. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(4), C.R. BUILDINGS QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: M/S. INGERSOLL RAND (INDIA) LTD., SOLITAIRE CORPORATE PARK-IV UNIT NOS.411 & 412, I FLOOR ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI. RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. SURYANARAYAN, ADV.) 2 THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30.8.2010 PASSED IN ITA NO.3952/MUM/2005, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02, PRAYING TO FORMULATE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN. ALLOW APPEAL AND SET ASIDE ORDERS PASSED BY ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.3952/MUM/2005 DATED 30-8-2010 AND CONFIRMING ORDER OF APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING ORDER PASSED BY ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI, IN INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for revenue. Mr.T.Suryanarayana, learned counsel for respondent. 2. Learned counsel for respondent submits that tax effect in this appeal is less than `1 Crore and therefore, appeal may not be maintainable in view of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. 3. In view of aforesaid submission, learned counsel for appellants submits that he be granted 3 liberty to revive appeal in case tax effect is more than `1 Crore. 4. In view of aforesaid submissions, appeal is disposed of with liberty to appellants to revive this appeal in case tax effect is more than `1 Crore. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV CIT (A), Bangalore / Addl. CIT, Circle-6(3), Mumbai / ACIT, Circle-11(4), Bangalore v. Ingersoll Rand (India) Ltd