Ita/404/2023 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Shiva Ferric Pvt Ltd

Digitallysigned byBHARATHI SLocation:HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA ITA No. 404 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. 404 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, 3RD FLOOR, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU -560001 CENTRAL, 3RD FLOOR, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU -560001 2. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL, PRESENT ADDRESS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU -560001 CENTRAL, PRESENT ADDRESS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU -560001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. RAVIRAJ Y V, ADVOCATE) SRI. RAVIRAJ Y V, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S SHIVA FERRIC PVT LTD NO 193, 4TH FLOOR, SHIV SADAN OUTER RING ROAD, B NARAYANAPURA BENGALURU -560016 PAN NO …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAGADISHCHANDRA KAMATH.K.,ADVOCATE) 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 NC: 2024:KHC:41206-DBITA No. 404 of 2023 APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLANT TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 380/BANG/2022 DATED 24.01.2023 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013 ANNEXURE- C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE U/S 263 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. Dilip. M., along with Sri. Raviraj. Y.V., for appellants/Revenue and learned counsel Sri. Jagadishchandra., 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 24.01.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short, ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA No.380/Bang/2022 for the assessment year 2012-13, raising the following substantial questions of law: - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:41206-DBITA No. 404 of 2023 “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature quashing order passed by CIT under section 263 of the Act by holding that there was no justification in passing the order since assessee had availed the DTVSV Scheme and settled the demand ignoring that the same will not preclude CIT fro exercising jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act and conditions for invoking section 263 of the were fully satisfied in present case? circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature quashing order passed by CIT under section 263 of the Act by holding that there was no justification in passing the order since assessee had availed the DTVSV Scheme and settled the demand ignoring that the same will not preclude CIT fro exercising jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act and conditions for invoking section 263 of the were fully satisfied in present case? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature in coming to the conclusion that assessing officer would not have assessed the premium amount and that the amount towards face value of the shares is part and parcel of the entire proceedings for which the assessee opted DTSVS without verification of the documents in this regard?” the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature in coming to the conclusion that assessing officer would not have assessed the premium amount and that the amount towards face value of the shares is part and parcel of the entire proceedings for which the assessee opted DTSVS without verification of the documents in this regard?” 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 - 4 - 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