ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs. RENUKA GATED COMMUNITY, ANANTAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 737/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 April 2021AY 2013-143 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not maintainable due to low tax effect, citing CBDT circulars. The Revenue was granted liberty to seek recall if exceptions applied.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2013-14. The Revenue's grounds of appeal questioned the CIT(A)'s findings on interest payments and the admission of an appeal against agreed additions.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal based on tax effect limits prescribed by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD

For Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Hearing: 08/03/2021Pronounced: 19/04/2021

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ACIT, Vs. M/s. Renuka Gated Circle-1, Community, Anantapur. Anantapur. PAN: AANFR 2245 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR Date of hearing: 08/03/2021 Date of pronouncement: 19/04/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, A.M:

This appeal is filed by the Revenue Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Kurnool in appeal No.034/CIT(A)/KNL/2016-17, dated 15/02/2018 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2013-14.

2.

The Revenue has raised four grounds in its appeal and they are extracted herein below for reference:-

“1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is bad both on facts and in law.

2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was right in stating that Rs. 61,30,000/- represent as payment of interest to one of the partner whereas no such payment was made by the partner.

3.

Whether Ld. CIT(A) was right in admitting appeal against agreed addition as the assessee has failed to prove coercion or malafide. Reliance is placed on the following judicial decisions on this issue: a) Rameshchandr & Co vs. CIT (Bom) 168 ITR 375. b) Ramanlal Kamdas vs. CIT (Mad.) 108 ITR 73. c) Mahesh B. Shah vs. CIT (Ker) 238 ITR 130. d) Sterling Machine Tools vs. CIT (All) 123 ITR 181. 4. Any other additional ground that may be urged at the time of appeal.” 3. None appeared before us to represent the case of the assessee. However, on examining the record, We find that the Revenue’s appeal is not maintainable as per the CBDT Circulars No.03/2018 dated 11- 07-2018 and Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 8th August, 2019 wherein the tax limit for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal has been fixed at Rs.50 Lakhs and in the assesse’s case the tax effect is less than fifty lacks. Therefore, We hereby dismiss this appeal on account of low tax effect. However, we make it clear that the Revenue is at liberty to seek recall of the order, if the case is found to be falling within the exceptions mentioned in the circulars cited above or otherwise found to be above the tax limit.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed. Pronounced in the open Court on the 19th April, 2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →