Ita/144/2021 Of The Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Bhakta Markandeshwara Minerals

Digitally signedby BHARATHI SLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA NC: 2024:KHC:39400-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23 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. 144 OF 2021 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560001 CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI N.,ADVOCATE) AND: M/S BHAKTA MARKANDESHWARA MINERALS DOOR NO 93, 3RD CROSS, WEAVERS CO OPERATIVE COLONY, HOSPET, KARNATAKA 583201 …RESPONDENT THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING 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. 1786/BANG/2017 DATED 31/07/2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 ANNEXURE-C CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED THE ASSISTANT TO - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:39400-DB COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BENGALURU AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, 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 Sushal Tiwari, 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 31.7.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.1786/Bang/2017 for the assessment year 2010-11, raising the following substantial questions of law: “1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in deleting the disallowance of expenses claimed to the tune of Rs.3,36,52,141/- by holding that same is covered in Rs.4 Crores surrendered by assessee vide letter dated 28.03.2011 when the assessee has not made any admission of undisclosed income in the hands of K.Mahesh Kumar and that is subject to appeal"? 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in directing the assessing authority to delete the disallowance of expenses holding that the disallowance is under the 'surrender of Rs.4 crores made in the hands of the assessee, the letter dated 28/3/2011', ignoring that no such surrender or admission of income has been made by the assessee-firm in any of the Assessment Year and the said letter of the assessee is the surrender of income in the case of Shri.Mahesh Kumar (who is a key person in the firm) and that is also subject of appeal"?” 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 ND List No.: 3 Sl No.: 0