Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.287/CTK/2018 Assessment Year : 2012-2013
ITO, (Exemptions) Ward Vs. M/s. Indian National Cuttack Association for Study, C/O. Dr. Shivam Prasad Singh, Department of Gastroentrolgy, SCB Medical College & Hospital, Mangalabag, Cuttack PAN/GIR No.AAATI 6221 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
C.O. No.40/CTK/2018 (arising out of ITA No.287/CTK/2018)
M/s. Indian National Vs. ITO, (Exemptions) Ward Association for Study, C/O. Cuttack Dr. Shivam Prasad Singh, Department of Gastroentrolgy, SCB Medical College & Hospital, Mangalabag, Cuttack PAN/GIR No.AAATI 6221 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri Keshav Debey, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Date of Hearing : 05/02/ 2019 Date of Pronouncement : 05/02/ 2019
O R D E R The appeal appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection
filed by the assessee are directed against the order of the
P a g e 1 | 4
Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)- Cuttack dated 27.3.2018
for the assessment year 2012-13.
The sole issue involved in the appeal of the revenue is that
the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), erred in holding that
“not recognizing the assessee as having registration u/s.12AA of
the I.T.Act, 1961”is a mistake apparent from record, , whereas,
the AO does not know the status of 12A application of the
assessee and it is not part of AO’s record.”
At the outset, ld A.R. for the assessee submitted that in the
order under section 154 of the Act, the total assessed income of
the assessee was determined at Rs.18,83,990/- and the tax on
the total income comes to Rs.8,01,876/- inclusive of interest
thereon. He submitted that the CIT(A) has held that the
rectification u/s.154 is not correct on the ground that the
Assessing Officer has not recognised a mistake apparent from
record and, therefore, the demand raised in the rectification order
u/s.154 dated 24.11.2016 was deleted. He submitted that in this
case, the tax effect is below Rs.20 lakhs which is the limit
prescribed by the CBDT not to file appeal before the Tribunal and,
therefore, the appeal filed by the revenue deserves to be
dismissed as not maintainable.
P a g e 2 | 4
Ld D.R. conceded that the tax effect is below Rs.20 lakhs in
the appeal filed by the revenue.
I have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials on
record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the tax
raised by the Assessing Officer is 11,08,250/-, which is below the
taxable limit prescribed by CBDT in Circular No.03/2018 dated
11.7.2018 not to file appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, in
view of the CBDT Circular No.03 of 2018 dated 11.7.2018 and
considering the fact that the tax effect is below Rs.20 lakhs, I
dismiss the appeal of the revenue as not maintainable.
The cross objection filed by the assessee is in support of the
order of the CIT(A). Since I have dismissed the appeal of the
revenue, the cross objection of the assessee has become
infructuous and hence, dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross objection of
the assessee are dismissed.
rder pronounced on 05/02/2019.
Sd/- (Chandra Mohan Garg) JUDICIALMEMBER Cuttack; Dated 05 /02/209 B.K.Parida, SPS
P a g e 3 | 4
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant : ITO, (Exemptions) Ward Cuttack 2. M/s. Indian National The Respondent. Association for Study, C/O. Dr. Shivam Prasad Singh, Department of Gastroentrolgy, SCB Medical College & Hospital, Mangalabag, Cuttack 3. The CIT(A)- 4. Pr.CIT- Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr. Pvt. Secretary, ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 4 | 4