THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), GUNTUR vs. MANNAVA BAPAIAH, GUNTUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 536/VIZ/2018Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 January 2020AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the subsequent order passed by the Assessing Officer, following a Section 263 order by the CIT, could not be considered an audit objection. Therefore, the CBDT circular regarding tax effect was applicable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee argued that the appeal was not maintainable due to the tax effect being below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The Revenue contended it was an exception due to an accepted audit objection.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect and applicability of CBDT circulars. Whether an order passed pursuant to a Section 263 direction constitutes an audit objection for exception purposes.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM “SMC” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri P. Bala Srinivas – CA
For Respondent: Smt. Mini Chandran – Sr.DR
Hearing: 19/12/2019

Date of hearing : 19/12/2019. Date of pronouncement : 08/01/2020. O R D E R This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Guntur, dated 02/08/2017 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

When this appeal is taken up for hearing, ld.AR has submitted that tax effect involved in this appeal is below Rs. 50.00 lakhs and as per CBDT Circular No. No.17/2019, dated 08/08/2019, this appeal is not maintainable.

3.

On the other hand, ld.DR has submitted that though tax effect involved in this appeal is below Rs. 50.00 lakhs, the Department is accepted the audit objection and therefore the assessee’s case is covered under the purview of exception 10(c) of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11/07/2018.

4.

We have heard both the sides. In this case, audit objection has been accepted by the department dated 19/07/2011. Subsequently, ld.Commissioner by considering the audit objection and also by exercising his powers conferred in him u/sec. 263 set aside the order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 15/03/2013 and directed him to redo the assessment. In pursuance to the order passed by the ld. CIT, the Assessing Officer has passed the order u/sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 dated 29/03/2014. In my opinion, the order passed by the Assessing Officer is in pursuance to the directions given by the ld. Commissioner on account of his earlier order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, therefore the order passed by the ld.Commissioner u/sec. 263 in pursuance to the audit objection there ends itself. The order passed by the Assessing Officer subsequently cannot be considered as audit objection and therefore the ground raised

by the department is not acceptable and the same is rejected. In my opinion, the CBDT Circular No.17/2019, dated 08/08/2019 shall squarely applies to the assessee’s case, which was followed by Notification No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ, dated 20/08/2019 wherein clarified that the revised monetary limits mentioned in Circular No.17/2019 are applicable to all pending appeals also, therefore this appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable and is dismissed accordingly.

6. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 08th day of Jan., 2020.

Sd/- (V. DURGA RAO) Judicial Member Dated: 08th January, 2020. vr/- Copy to: 1. 1. The Assessee – Mannava Bapaiah, D.No. 26-34-53/1, A.T. Agraharam, Guntur. 2. The Revenue – DCIT, Circle-1(1), Guntur. 3. The Pr.CIT, Guntur. 4. The CIT(A)-1, Guntur. 5. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. 6. Guard file. By order (VUKKEM RAMBABU) Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →