Ita/450/2018 Of The Pr Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Bharat Infra Tech (P) Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU|DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND| THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S. SANJAY GOWDAINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.450/2018C/WINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.448/2018 IN I.T.A. NO.450/2018 BETWEEN: 1.THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIT(A) 5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA| BENGALURU - 560 O95. 2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PRESENT ADDRESS CIRCLE-1(1)(2) ! FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA| BENGALURU - 560 095. _ APPELLANTS (BY SRI ARAVIND K.V., ADVOCATE) AND M/S. BHARAT INFRA TECH (P) LTD.,NO.186, 1 CROSS,HOSUR ROAD WILSON GARDEN BENGALURU - 560 O27 PAN: AACCB O960 F| .. RESPONDENT (BY SRI A. SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FORSRI LAVA M., ADVOCATE) OK AK THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A.OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO: (I)FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAWSTATED ABOVE;STATED ABOVE; (II)ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED|BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURUIN C.O. NO.211/BANG/2015 IN (ITA 1442/B/14) DATED19.01.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER,OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE.BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURUIN C.O. NO.211/BANG/2015 IN (ITA 1442/B/14) DATED19.01.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND CONFIRM THE ORDER,OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE. ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BENGALURU; (III) TO PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS)HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS ANDCIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE AND EQUITY.HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS ANDCIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN I.T.A. NO.448 /2018 BETWEEN: 1.THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIT(A)5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING,5 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 8O FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA| BENGALURU - 560 095. 2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PRESENT ADDRESS CIRCLE-1(1)(2) 2 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING8O FEET ROAD,8O FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA|BENGALURU - 560 095. _ APPELLANTS (BY SRI ARAVIND K.V., ADVOCATE) AND M/S. BHARAT INFRA TECH (P) LTD.,NO.186, 1[S|]CROSS,HOSUR ROAD WILSON GARDENBENGALURU - 560 O27 PAN: AACCB O960 F|.. RESPONDENT (BY SRI A. SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FORSRI LAVA M., ADVOCATE) AK OK THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION J60A.OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO: (I)FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAWSTATED ABOVE;STATED ABOVE; (II)ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED|BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURUIN I.T.A. NO.1442/BANG/2014 DATED 19.01.2018 VIDEANNEXURE-CCONFIRMING|THE.ORDER|OF|THEAPPELLAIECOMMISSIONERAND|CONFIRMTHEORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF.INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BENGALURU;BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURUIN I.T.A. NO.1442/BANG/2014 DATED 19.01.2018 VIDEANNEXURE-CCONFIRMING|THE.ORDER|OF|THEAPPELLAIECOMMISSIONERAND|CONFIRMTHEORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF.INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BENGALURU; (III) TO PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS)HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND.CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE AND EQUITY.HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND.CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE INCOME TAX APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS.THIS DAY,SANJAY GOWDA J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT These two appeals are filed by the Department challengingthe dismissal of the appeal and also allowing of cross-objections|which resulted in dismissal of the appeal for the assessment year|2007-08. (III) TO PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS)HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND.CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE AND EQUITY.HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND.CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF.JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE INCOME TAX APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS.THIS DAY,SANJAY GOWDA J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT These two appeals are filed by the Department challengingthe dismissal of the appeal and also allowing of cross-objections|which resulted in dismissal of the appeal for the assessment year|2007-08. 2. ITA 4450/2018 is preferred challenging the order of theTribunal by which the cross-objections of the assessee were.upheld and as a consequence, the assessment order dated31.17.2009 was neld to be Invalid in law. 3. It is not in dispute that as per the order of theAssessing Officer, the following six additions were made: 4. It was thus held that the assessee was liable to pay aSumof|Rs.1,54,48 268/-.Being|aggrievedbytheSald|assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal. | 5. In the appeal, out of the six additions mentioned above,except tne addition relating to Loss on sale of land-MysoreBranch amounting to Rs.6,50,500/-, the remaining five additions|were held to be improper. | 6. It is also pertinent to state here that these additionswere in fact accepted to be incorrect by the remand report itself. |In respect of fourth addition i.e., bad debt, the remand report|partially|acceptedtnat|additionsCOtneextentofRs.1,30,10,250/- is bad inlaw. 7. It is submitted that as per the remand report, additionsto an extent of Rs.2,08,18,890/- stood reduced and taking intoconsideration the return of income already filed, the amountinvolved was a sum of Rs.1,19,35,208/- of which the tax liability|would only be a sum of Rs.37,98,432/-. 8. In view of the fact that the tax liability by virtue ofdeletion of the additions under the remand order would be lessthan Rs.1,00,00,000/- appeal would not be maintainable as perCircular No.17/2019 and appeal would have to be thereforedismissed. _— 9. It is also pertinent to state nere that assuming that thisappeal of the department is to be allowed and the matter isremanded to the Tribunal, even then the subject matter of the.appeal would Rs.50,00,000/- and that would also be lesser in-Monetarylimits|thanprescribedInCircular|No.17/2019. |In other words, no useful purpose would be served as the taxeffect in this case would be below Rs.50,00,000/-. | 10. It is to be stated here tnat if the additions disallowedby the Appellate Authority on the basis of the remand order istaken into consideration and the return of Rs.1,19,35,208/- istaken into consideration, the tax liability on the said sum would|actually be less than Rs.50,00,000/- and the appeal before the)Appellate Authority cannot be maintained. | 11. In view of the above, we find that the appeals filed bythe Department does not deserve acceptance. Accordingly, both.theappealsare|GISMISSE€Einaccordance.WwitnCircular|No.1/7/2019. 12. It is needless to state that dismissal of the appealswould not amount to affirmation or deciding any question of lawinvolved in these proceedings. | Sd/- JUDGE|Sd/-|JUDGE Sd/-| JUDGE