Date Of Order: 27.03.2018 Ita v. Ohri Revansiddeshwar Co-Operative Credit Society
High Court
27 Mar 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · karhckalaburagi
Parties
Date Of Order: 27.03.2018 Ita v. Ohri Revansiddeshwar Co-Operative Credit Society
Date of order
27 Mar 2018
Assessment year(s)
2010-2011
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Date Of Order: 27.03.2018 Ita v. Ohri Revansiddeshwar Co-Operative Credit Society, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAKALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27 DAY OF MARCH 2O18
PRESENT
THR HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE VINBET KOTHARI
ANT
THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. DEVDAS
INCOME TAX APPEAL No.100036/2016C/WINCOME TAX APPEAL No.100035/2016
ITA No. 100036/2016
Between:
1.The Principal Commissioner of Income TaxDr. B.R. Ambedkar Veedhi, BelagaviDr. B.R. Ambedkar Veedhi, Belagavi
2.The Income Tax OfficerWard-2, Biyapur
(By Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate)
... Appellan
And:
Shri RevansiddeshwarCo-operative Credit SocietyMain Road, Horti, Indi TalukByapur District — 586 209PAN: AABAS 3319N
(By Sri G.B. Yadav, Advocate)
... Responde
Date of order: 27.03.2018ITA No.100036/2016 C/W ITA No.100035/2016The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vsohri Revansiddeshwar Co-operative Credit Society
2
This Income Tax Appeal is filed under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, praying to formulate thesubstantial questions of law stated above and allow theappeal and set aside the orders passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench “A” Bangalore in ITANo.843(B)/2014 Dtd. 31.08.2015 and confirm the orderpassed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gokak.
ITA No.100035/2016:
Between:
1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Road, Belagavi
2.The Income Tax OfficerWard-2, VijayapurWard-2, Vijayapur
(By Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate)
... Appellan
And:
M/s Basavan Bagewadi TalukaPrimary teachers Co-Operative SocietyBasavan Bagewadi — 586 203PAN: AAAABSS94K
(By Sri G.B. Yadav, Advocate)
... Responde
This Income Tax Appeal is filed under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, praying to formulate the substantialquestions of law stated above and allow the appeal and setaside the orders passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, BangaloreBench2? “Bangalore1nNITANo.1503/BANG/2014 Dtd. 30.07.2015 and confirm theorder passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Vijayapur.
Date of order: 27.03.2018
ITA No.100036/2016 C/W ITA No.100035/2016The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vsohri Revansiddeshwar Co-operative Credit Society
!
These appeals coming on for admission this day,VINEET KOTHARI J.,delivered the following:
JU DGMENT
Mr. Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate for Appellant-Revenue
Mr. G.B. Yadav, Advocate for Respondent-Assessee
1.Both these appeals are filed by the Revenueagainst the Assessee for Assessment Year2010-2011 and 2011-2012 respectively. TheIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal had decidedboth the Income Tax Appeals filed by theassessee in|ITA No.843(B)/2014and by theRevenue1nITANo.1503/Bang/2014allowing the appeal of the assessee vide orderdated31.08.2015and dismissing the appealof the Revenue vide order dated30.07.2015
?)The two issues arising in these appeals wereabout the deletion of the additions made by
Date of order: 27.03.2018ITA No.100036/2016 C/W ITA No.100035/2016The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vsohri Revansiddeshwar Co-operative Credit Society
G
the Income Tax Officer under Section 43B ofthe Act in the hands of the Assessee andconsequential imposition of penalty undersection 271 (1) (c) of the Act at the rate of100% ot the tax amount.
3.The learned counsel for the respondent-Assessee has raised a preliminary objectionabout the maintainability of these appealsandhasfurnishedbetoreUS|a&-2computation showing that the “tax eftect”involved in both these appeals filed by theRevenue is less than)Rs.20,00,000/-andtherefore, these appeals filed by the Revenueare not maintainable in view ot CircularNo.21/2015issued by Central Board DirectTaxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry ofFinance,GovernmentoT|India,4-&%410.12.2015, according to which the appeals
Date of order: 27.03.2018ITA No.100036/2016 C/W ITA No.100035/2016The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vsohri Revansiddeshwar Co-operative Credit Society
3.The learned counsel for the respondent-Assessee has raised a preliminary objectionabout the maintainability of these appealsandhasfurnishedbetoreUS|a&-2computation showing that the “tax eftect”involved in both these appeals filed by theRevenue is less than)Rs.20,00,000/-andtherefore, these appeals filed by the Revenueare not maintainable in view ot CircularNo.21/2015issued by Central Board DirectTaxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry ofFinance,GovernmentoT|India,4-&%410.12.2015, according to which the appeals
Date of order: 27.03.2018ITA No.100036/2016 C/W ITA No.100035/2016The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vsohri Revansiddeshwar Co-operative Credit Society
Bunder Section 260A of the Act before HighCourts cannot be filed by the Department, ifthe tax effect is below|Rs.20,00,000/-
4LearnedcounselfortheRespondent-Assessee submitted that the tax effect in thepresent cases comes to Rs.14,69,430/- andRs.15,26,030/- respectively for both theassessment years and therefore the presentappeals filed by ReEVeENUaAlr( &maintainable.
5.Learned counsel for the appellant-RevenueMr.Ameet Kumar Deshpande is not able tocontrovert this statement oft the learnecounsel for the respondent-Assessee.
6.In view of the aforesaid CBDT Circular, thepresent appeals filed by the Revenue are heldto be not maintainable and the same are
Date of order: 27.03.2018
ITA No.100036/2016 C/W ITA No.100035/2016The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vsohri Revansiddeshwar Co-operative Credit Society
"
accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.
No costs,
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE
LG
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.