And Ranka v. C.i.t And Another Is Pending Before
High Court
01 Oct 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
And Ranka v. C.i.t And Another Is Pending Before
Date of order
01 Oct 2012
Assessment year(s)
2000-01
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In And Ranka v. C.i.t And Another Is Pending Before, the High Court (2012) allowed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 1 DAY OF OCTOBER 2012
PRESENT:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
INCOME TAX APPEAL No.10/2007
BETWEEN:
1.THE COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME-TAX DAVANGERE.
2.ASST. COMMISISIONER OF
INCOME TAX CIRCLE – 1 UDUPI.
... APPELLANTS
(By Sri E.SANMATHI INDRA KUMAR, ADV.)
AND:
M/S.JERRY V.DIAS PROPRIETOR J.J.BUILDERSI SHIRIBEEDU UDUPI.
... RESPONDENT
(By Sri. A.SHANKAR, Adv. & SRI.M.LAVA, Adv.)
This I.T.A. is filed under Section 260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 16-06-2006 passed in ITA.No.1715/Bang/2004 for the Assessment Year 2000-01, praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
i. Formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein,
ii. Set aside the order passed by the ITAT in ITA No. 1715/Bang/2004 dtd: 16-06-2006 and confirm the order of the Appellate Commissioner confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer, in the interest of Justice and equity.
This Appeal coming on for hearing, on this day, SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
It is the contention of the respondent-assessee
that the monetary limit is less than Rs.10,00,000/-.
Hence the appeal is not maintainable.
2. The decision of this court in M/s. Ranka
and Ranka Vs. C.I.T and Another is pending before
Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 27468/2012.
Subject to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 27468/2012, the appeal is disposed off with liberty to the appellant to move for review if the SLP is allowed in favour of the appellants.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Bsv
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue