Ita/4/2010 Of The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S Cepha Imaging Pvt Ltd
High Court
22 Feb 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Ita/4/2010 Of The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S Cepha Imaging Pvt Ltd
Date of order
22 Feb 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Ita/4/2010 Of The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S Cepha Imaging Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.
Decision: 4In view of the aforesaid declaration, the present appeal is disposed of as not pressed. | Sd/-.JUDGE| Sd/-.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
AND
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA
ITA NO.4/2010
BETWEEN
1.|THER DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX
INTERNATIONAL TAXATION
RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN)
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BANGALORE.|
2 |THR INCOME TAX OFFICKBR
(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)
WARD-1(1), BANGALORE.
APPELLANTS.
(BY SRILK.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
AND
M/S. CEPHA IMAGING PVT.LTD.,.31, KEMPAPURA, HEBBALBANGALORE -560 024.
RBSPONDENT|
(BY SRI.K.K.CHYTHANYA, ADVOCATE)|
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-AOF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, TO SET ASIDE THE)ORDBR PASSBD BY THR ITAT BANGALORE IN ITA!NO.1180/BANG/2008,DATED|24.07.2009CONHKIRMINGTH EORDERORTHEAPPBHRLLATCOMMISSIONBR AND CONFIRM THR ORDER PASSED|BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONALTAXATION).WARD-1(1),BANGALORE,INTHEINTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EOUITY.—
THIS APPBAL COMING ON FOR HBARING THISDAY,JAYANTPATEL,J*)fDHBLIVE RETHEFOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The present appeal is directed against the Orderdated 24.07.2009 passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal in ITA No.1180/Bang/2008.|
a2This matter was considered by this Court on15.05.2016 and the following order was passed:
“Although matter could have been considered|In|VIEW|of|CircularNo.21/ 15dated10.12.2015)however,Mr.|KV.|Aravind,learned counsel for the Revenue seeks timeto |
get additional details for non-applicabulity ofthe circular. Hence, stand over to 22.2.2016.” |
3.Today, Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, learned Counsel
appearing for Mr. K.V. Aravind, learned Counsel for theAppellants-Revenue states that as conveyed to him by >Mr. K.V. Aravind, learned Counsel, as the subject taxliability is less than Rs.20 lakhs, the same would standcovered by Circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 andhence the appeal is not to be pursued further and heprays that in view of the Circular dated 10.12.2015, theappeal may be disposed of as not pressed.
4In view of the aforesaid declaration, the
present appeal is disposed of as not pressed. |
Sd/-.JUDGE|
Sd/-.
AN/-JUDGE
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.