Ita/137/2023 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Vectra Advanced

Digitally signed byBHARATHI SLocation:HIGH COURTOFKARNATAKA NC: 2024:KHC:41290-DB ITA No. 137 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 137 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), PRESENT ADDRESS DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. RAVIRAJ Y V, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. VECTRA ADVANCED ENGINEERING PVT. LTD., VECTRA HOUSE NO.15, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560009. PAN: AABCV 1355K …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 2025/BANG/2018 DATED 05/01/2022 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 ANNEXURE -C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1) (1), BENGALURU AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Heard the learned counsel Sri. Dilip. M., along with Sri. Raviraj. Y.V., for appellants/Revenue. 2. The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) questioning the correctness and legality of order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.2025/Bang/2018 for the assessment year 2010-11, raising the following substantial questions of law: “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in - 3 - law in holding that income from lease of building for 99 years is required to be treated as income from house property ignoring that assessing authority rightly treated said income as income from other sources as the assesse was not the owner of the building and considered the rental income from letting out factory building, plant/machinery? 2. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature as Tribunal failed to observe that rental income received is inseparable as per the agreement?”case and in law, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature as Tribunal failed to observe that rental income received is inseparable as per the agreement?” 3. It is noticedthat the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal would not be maintainable at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the matter falls within the exceptions under the aforesaid Circular dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024. 5. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue. However, the question of law is kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE BS List No.: 4 Sl No.: 10