The Commissioner of Income Tax III, Hyderabad. vs. Shrilekha Hire Purchase and Finance [P] Ltd.,

ITTA/18/2008HC TelanganaHBHC01021174200819 August 2023Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Department was dismissed in terms of CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, as the tax effect was well below the monetary limit of Rs. 1.00 crore. The Court reasoned that the circular, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to reduce litigation, enhanced the monetary limits for filing appeals. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the stipulated monetary limit are to be dismissed. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal. However, the Department was given the liberty to seek revival of the appeal if it came within the exceptions under paragraph 10 of Circular No. 3 of 2018. No order as to costs was made.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, as the appellant, filed an Income Tax Tribunal Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This appeal was against the order dated 30.10.2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', for the assessment year 2000-2001. The Tribunal's order was itself preferred against an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) IV, Hyderabad, which in turn was against an order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-3(1), Hyderabad. The present appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax III, Hyderabad. The High Court noted that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the monetary limit for filing appeals as stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable in light of the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which amended the monetary limits for filing appeals before the High Court to Rs. 1.00 crore. The Revenue argued that the appeal was filed in accordance with the law applicable at the time of filing. The Respondent (assessee) did not record any arguments in the judgment. The Tribunal had to decide if the appeal was barred by the monetary limit specified in the circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[ 3386 I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD SATURDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY INCOM E TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 18 0F 2008 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ' B' Hyderabad, in ITA No.61/Hyd/2003 for Assessment year 2000_2OO.l dated:30-'10-2006, preferred against the order of the commissioner of lncome Tax , (Appeals) lV, Hyderabad, Appeat tTA.No.104 to 107/DC-3(iyCtT(A)-tV/2003_ 04,dated:13-08-2003,preferred against the order of the Deputy comrnissioner of lncome Tax-3(1), Hyderabad PAN/GlR No.SH-82 dated:26-03-2003. Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax lll, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND Shrilekha Hire Purchase & Finance (P) Ltd_, 10--3-56 t4t1, East lvlarredpally, Secunderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel forthe Appellant: SRI B. NARASTMHA SHARMA, SC FOR lT DEPARTMENT Counsel forthe Respondent: SRI B. SAPNA REDDY The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT Trl :D HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM I(OSIlf AND TIIE HON,I: I,I, SRI JUSTICII LAXMI NARAYA,{A ALISHETTY I.T.T.A. No.18 of 2OO8 CourL as a mea ilrre for reducir-rg litigation. In paraglap -r 2 of the yt-:r I {L .'..ie ;;rr Justl.e P.SAM KOSHY) the re spot-rrl t:nt '2. This appt: . u.nder Sectiot-i 260A of the lr: c orne Tax Act, 1961, has bec L preferred by the Revenue as tl.re appellant again st th,-' or le:r dt.30.10.2006 passed b,' :-l-it lncome Tax Appcllate TrLb rr: al, Hl,dera'rad Bench 'E', l:11'tlerrbad, 1n Income Tax A1 F'ellate Triburals, High Cotrrts al rd Supreme Hearcl Sri il flarasimha Szrrma, learned cotLrts,el irppearing for the appellar':. ,Lnd Smt. B. Sapna Reddy, eartl:ri c(,unsel for I ITA.No.61/H1,d, 2,)C3 for the assessment year 2OCr()-:10(r1 No.3 of 20 8 d. 1 L.C7 .2078. Lrt, further enha:'icing t re monetary limris for fi ing r p peals bv the lncome Tex De1>artr-rl.e'-Lt before the 3. Clentlal ts,:.rd of Dircct 'lzrxes (CBDT) ILas is,sirec.. Circular l No.17 of 2019 iI .08.08.2019, amending the prr:'zi:rt-rs Circular said Circular. r' : fir-rd lhat th: rnonetary limit fi,re d for liling an appcal befc. r'c t I r: Hrgh Conrt is lis. 1 .00 crore

Z 4. In the instant appeal, tax effect is well below the monetary limit. 5. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid Circular No.17 of 20i9 dt.O8.0B.2Ol9. However, if the appeal comes within the exception under paragraph 10 of Circular No.3 of 2018, it would be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revival of the appeal. No order as to costs. 6. Consequently, miscelianeous petitions pending, if any, sha-ll stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/.M.VIJAYA BHASKAR JOINtrREGISTRAR (]D SECION OFFICER To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal' Hyderabad Bench ' B' Hyderabad' 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax , (Appeals) lV' Hyderabad' 3. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax-3(1)' Hyderabad' 4. One CC to SRI B. NARASIMHA SHARMA' SC FOR lT DEPARTMENT toPUCl 5. One CC to SRI B. SAPNA REDDY' Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies kam t

HIGH COURT PSK,J & L.NA JI DATED:19/08i 2 023 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.18 o1l i1008 --,:=:r1'^ .:'iY.i Srr'lc Or I /:, 1' ) t. $ t, 5tl N8 ., t 4 {:: ,.- -, ------' ) L ) t { r-:' t-/ ) ITTA IS DISM SiSED ?) ,- ---ffi

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →