Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 26]

Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Century Park on 19 March, 2012

Bench: N.Kumar, Ravi Malimath

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 19"' DAY OF MARCH 2012 

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICJE"VN'.'i§I_}IV:!AR«  V  "

AND

THE HON'BLE MR.JusTICEf'RAvI V.M'ALI'P4ATl-TERRA 

ITA. NO; "iooEei  or-EA   

 

BETWEEN:    '

1. The Commis_sior§:e'rVofinCome+TaxA "" "
Central   A 
C.R.Bui|din.g,'l._ ;f_ '
Queensr"Rr)ad;, 

Bangalore,   

2. The Joint Commissio'ne'r"--..Qf'
Income Tax, - V  ' " "
Speci«a|_ Range--__3',' '
_ C.V_~Ri,Bu_j|'ding,  ..... 
 Qu'een"s"Rdard,
A VB'anVga~l.Q"re.'«.   ...APPELLANTS

 V (B.yLSRri-HG.Ténfiaiéieihar, Advocate)

 V' Cen'tury Park,
 NC-.73,/1', Sheriff Centre,

 _"-«Sm Eloor, St.Marks Road, 



Bangalore - 560 001. ...RESPONDENT

(By Sri A.Shankar and Sri M.Lava, Advocates)

***

This ITA filed under section 260-A of.'I'.'T';Act,ii"'1:961 ii ii arising out of order dated 20;01'.'2006g .;pas"se_d_"in 1 ITA.No.246/Bang/2004 for the Assessment--Ye'a.rs-.1'995{96,"i;_' praying to formulate the substantial "q_uestioVns'*of law,' stated therein, allow the appeaigand set aside 'the.._ord.er passed by the ITAT, Banga|ore'~in"'V«ITA.Nc;246,/Bang/2004 dated 20.01.2006 & confirm thegorder passed by the Appellate Commissioner rconfirm'i'ng_:'theA.order "p'as'sed by the Joint Commissioner of'fIncom;e.Tax",v.i Special Range--3, Bangalore.

This ITA conning' onyliroirihjaarafigfihyis day, N.KUMAR J., delivered the folil'ow;iin'gV:~_ ' _ ' The"--.net4itaxi:eif:fe.ct the subject matter of this appeal accoriiding-tot-he'.Revenue Rs.9,20,008/--. According ,--to the'iasse'ssee iiti"i's»o_n.ly Rs.4,56,488/. In either event it lessthan'«.l§'s..10,00,000/--. In view of the Circular V No.3/i'20i11V hieild to be retrospective in operation by this ' Court ianydiit applicable to pending appeals. This appeal iswnioti"maintainable. In that view of the matter, the appeal dismissed as not maintainable only on the ground of la/ being less than the monetary limit without going into question on merits.

Rsk