Ita/287/2021 Of The Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri Vijaykumar Thimmegowda

Digitallysigned byBHARATHI SLocation:HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA NC: 2024:KHC:39408-DB ITA No. 287 of 2021 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. 287 OF 2021 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE C R BUILDING, QUEEN'S ROAD BENGALURU 560001 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2)(1) PRESENT ADDRESS DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1) C R BUILDING, QUEEN'S ROAD BENGALURU 560001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y V.,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. DILIP M, ADVOCATE) AND: SHRI VIJAYKUMAR THIMMEGOWDA NO 1312, 11TH MAIN VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU 560040 PAN …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MADHUSUDHAN, U A.,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 ABOVE, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. TO 2928/BANG/2017 DATED 02/11/2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 ANNEXURE-C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY 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 Madhusudhan U.A, learned counsel 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 02.11.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.2928/Bang/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15, raising the following substantial questions of law: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in deleting the additions taking the liberal view of the provisions of Rule 9A(3) of the Act by giving more importance to wordings Exhibition of Films on a Commercial Basis’ than the word ‘Area’ on the basis of technical change and advancement? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature in holding that the provision of Rule 9A(3)(c) suggests exhibition in different geographical regions not different mediums such as Audio Rights and TV Rights? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing the appeal of assessee by setting aside additions of Rs.5,75,00,000/- and Rs.15,00,000/- by holding that it may not be correct to give importance to the words “areas” in the provision of Rule 9A(3) and primary importance should be given to the expression business’ exhibition of film on commercial basis’ and word ‘all’ has to be given more importance without appreciating that said Rule suggests exhibition in different geographical regions and not different mediums and ignoring ‘area’ set out in said Rule which will override the provision itself, which has not been amended till date on the basis of technical change and advancements?” 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. 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 ND List No.: 3 Sl No.: 19 Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE