Date Of Order: 20.03.2018 Ita v. Sri Basavangouda R. Patil(Yatnal

IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI! BENC DATED THIS THE 20 DAY OF MARCH 2O18 PRESENT THR HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE VINBET KOTHARI ANT THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICEK R. DBEVD INCOME TAX APPEAL No.200020/2015 Between: Income Tax OfficerWard No.1,Ayakar BhavanAthani Road,Vijayapura-586101. ... Appella (By Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate) And: ori Basavangouda R. Patil (Yatnal)sindagi Road,Viayapura-o96101PAN: AHYPP 3824A ... Responde (By Sri G.B.Yadav, Advocate forsri K.R.Prasad, Advocate) This Income Tax Appeal is filed under Section 26O(A)of the Income Tax Act, praying to allow this appeal and to set Date of order: 20.03.2018 ITA 200020/2015Income Tax Officer Vs Sri Basavangouda R. Patil(Yatnal) 2 aside the judgment and order dated 22.06.2015 passed inITA No.601/B/2014 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, C-Bench, Bangalore, setting aside the order passedby the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Belgaum,dated 04.02.2014 passed in ITA No.49/BGM/2011-12 and topass any other appropriate order as may be necessary, This appeal coming on for admission this day,VINEET KOTHARI J., delivered the following: JU DBiGMENT Mr. Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate for AppellantMr. G.B.Yadav, Advocate for Respondent 1.The learned counsel for the respondent-assessee has pointed out before us that the presentappeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 is not maintainable, because theTaxeffect1n thepresentCaSE€1S.less 0'"Rs.20,00,000/- and therefore in accordance with theCircular No.21/2015dated10[#$]December, 2015issuedby the|CentralBoard|oT DirectTaxes,Department,oT|Revenue, Ministry|oT|Finance,Government of India with regard to guidelines for filingof the appeals before the Appellate Tribunal, High Date of order: 20.03.2018 ITA 200020/2015Income Tax Officer Vs Sri Basavangouda R. Patil(Yatnal) ? Courts and Supreme Court, the present appeal is notmaintainable. a2The learned counsel for the assessee hasexplained before the Court that in the present case thedisputed capital gains amounted to Rs.88,82,364/-attracting 20% tax thereon i.e., Rs.17,76,473/- andadding 3% surcharge thereon of Rs.53,294/- the totaltax effect for the present case would beRs.18,29,764/-since the said tax effect is less than Rs.20,00,000/- asper Circular No.21/2015above, the present appeal isnot maintainable. 3.The learned Tribunal has held in favour ofthe respondent-assessee that the capital gain tax in thepresent case for Assessment Year2009-2010is notattractedbecausethe aSSCSSEEmadethedeposit/investment in the prescribed security before thereturn was filed by the assessee. Date of order: 20.03.2018 ITA 200020/2015Income Tax Officer Vs Sri Basavangouda R. Patil(Yatnal) @ 4The contention raised by learned counsel forthe revenue is that said investment/deposit was madeafter the due date of filing of return of income undersection 139 (1) of the Income Tax Act which expired inthepresentCaSCOT]91.07.2010>.whereastheinvestment was made on.00.09.2010 5.However, we are not required to go into thisquestion, aS we are satisfied that the tax effect in thepresent case is below Rs.20,00,000/-, the cut off limitprescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes underthe Circular No.21/2015dated10.12.2015. Therefore,the present appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed onthat ground. No costs. Sd/- Sd/- JUDGE JUDGE ;!/