Ita/258/2022 Of The Pr.commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Hindustan Marble And Granite

Digitally signedby BHARATHISLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA NC: 2024:KHC:39424-DB ITA No. 258 of 2022 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. 258 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1) C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y V.,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. DILIP M, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S HINDUSTAN MARBLE AND GRANITE No.5, LALBAGH ROAD WILSON GARDEN BENGALURU - 560 027. PAN …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL.,ADVOCATE) THIS ITA/ INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED TO BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.871/BANG/2019 DATED 18/11/2021 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-2016 ANNEXURE-C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. 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 Raviraj Y.V, along with learned counsel Sri Dilip M, for appellants/Revenue and learned counsel Sri Sandeep Huilgol, for the respondent/assessee. 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 18.11.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.871/Bang/2019 for the assessment year 2015-16, raising the following substantial questions of law: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal order can be said as perverse in nature in deleting the addition of `4,14,72,998 wherein gross profit percentage was adopted by the assessing authority as per Audit Report submitted by assessee for A.Y. 2015-16? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing appeal preferred by assessee by setting aside addition made by assessing authority by allowing telescoping when the assessee has not proven the connection between the sales and the cessation of liability offered as undisclosed income? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order allowing appeal preferred by assessee by holding that the assessing authority is not right in re-determining turnover ignoring materials brought on record by assessing authority and rightly confirmed by CIT(A)?” 3. Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal should not be entertained 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 questions of law are 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.: 34