Ita/135/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Cauvery Kalpatharu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BBNGALURU DATED THIS THE: DAY OF JANUARY, 2016 PRESENT THR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL AND THR HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA| ITA No.135/2015 BETWEEN 1.The Commissioner ot Income-taxNo.99/1, Shilpashree BuildingNo.99/1, Shilpashree Building Vishweshwaranagar Mysore-570 OOS. Oo.The Asst. Commissioner | ot Income-Tax Circle-1(2), No.5o/1, ohilpashree Building Vishweshwaranagar Mysore-570 OOS. ..Appellants (By Sri K.V. Aravind, Advocate) AND M/s. Cauvery KalpatharuGrameena Bank.No.314, Dewan’s RoadMysore-570 OOS. ... RESponden (By Sri B.K. Mohan, Advocate) This Income-tax Appeal is filed under Section260-A of Income-tax Act 1961, to set aside the orderpassedby theITAT,Bangalore|in.M.P.No.36/Bang/2014, ITANo.394/Bang/2012—dated:05/12/2014 confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by theAsst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1(2), Mysore. This appeal coming on for Admission this day,|N.K. Patil, J.,delivered the following: JUDGMENT This appeal is by the revenue questioning the)correctness of the order dated 5.12.2014 passed in MP|No.36/Bang/2014 jin ITA No.394/Bang/2012] on the file of|the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore confirming theorder passed by the Appellate Commissioner and confirm theorder passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle — 1/2], Mysore to consider the following substantial| question of law. ‘WhetherOF.thefactsandinthecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal ts right in|law in not following its own decision in the case.of Syndicate Bank ITA No.668 & 669/B/2010dated 19.6.2013 and overlooking its own decisionconstituted a mistake rectifiable under section2254/2] of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and furtheralso overlooking the Hon’ble Supreme Courtdecision in 343 ITR 270 [SC/ in the case of|CatholicSyrianBankandalso.Board’s|Instruction No. 17/2008 dated: 26.11.2008?" 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the|appellantsandlearnedcounselappearingforthe respondent. 3,At|theoutset,learnedCounselfor.therespondent submitted that in view of the Circular bearingNo.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, since the subject matter is less than Rs.20 lakhs, the appeal is not maintainable beforethis Court. 4In reply to the said submission, learned Counsel|for the appellants has not disputed the submission made bythe learned counsel for the respondent. 5.Submission of learned counsel for the parties isplaced on record. 6.This appeal is disposed of, following the circular|bearing No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015. Ordered accordingly. AN/- Sd/-JUDGE Sd/-JUDGE