M/S. ESTATE OF SHYAMLAL KHEMKA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 17(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1276/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 April 2026AY 2021-225 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the levy of surcharge at the maximum marginal rate of 37% was not sustainable as the assessee's income was below Rs. 5,00,00,000/-. Following a Special Bench decision, the excess surcharge was directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an AOP, filed its return declaring an income of Rs. 10,83,960/-. The CPC levied a surcharge of Rs. 1,20,320/- at 37% on the tax amount, leading to increased cess and interest. The assessee's rectification application was rejected by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the applicability of the maximum marginal rate of surcharge on income below Rs. 5,00,00,000/- for an AOP. The Tribunal examined whether the surcharge should be computed based on slab rates or the maximum marginal rate.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154,Section 234,Section 2(29C)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H (SMC

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Bekal, AR, Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.04.2026

Per Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal ADDL/JCIT (A) Agra [for brevity “Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act'), for Assessment Year 2021-22 date of order 29/12/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the CPC, Bangalore, Income Tax Department (for brevity “the Ld. AO”) order passed u/s 154 of the Act date of order 20/02/2023. 2. We heard the rival submissions and considered the documents available in the record. The issue raised before the Bench that the assessee is an AOP. During the impugned assessment year the assessee filed

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →