THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - IV, HYDERABAD. vs. M/S. PRABHATH AGRI BIO TECH PVT.LTD., HYDERABAD.

ITTA/256/2012HC TelanganaHBHC01047983201218 February 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed in terms of CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, which enhanced the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department. The Court noted that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 2.00 crore for filing appeals before the High Court. The reasoning was purely based on the CBDT's policy to reduce litigation by setting higher monetary thresholds for appeals. The Court also stated that if the appeal fell within the exceptions of Circular No. 5 of 2024, it would be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revival of the appeal. No order as to costs was made, and pending miscellaneous petitions were closed.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, Hyderabad) against an order dated 08-08-2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench 'B'. The ITAT's order was in relation to ITA No.94/Hyd/08 for the Assessment Year 2004-2005. The appeal before the High Court was preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad, which in turn was against the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(3), Hyderabad. The respondent is M/s. Prabhath Agri Bio Tech Pvt. Ltd. The tax effect in the instant appeal was stated to be well below the monetary limit prescribed for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court in light of the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, presented the appeal. The judgment does not explicitly state the Revenue's arguments on the merits of the case, but rather focuses on the procedural aspect of the appeal's maintainability based on the tax effect and CBDT circulars. The Revenue relied on the fact that an appeal was filed, implying a belief in its merits or the applicability of exceptions to the circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

134471 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 256 OF 2012 Appeal filed under Section 260(4) of the lncome-Tax Act, against the order dated. 08-08-2008 passed in lTA.No.94/Hydi08 for Assessment Year 2004-2005 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated: 13-12-2007 passed in ITA No.289/DC- _-.. . 16(1yClT(A)-Vl2006-07 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad preferred against the Assessment Order dated. 05-12-2006 passed in PAN/GIR No. AABCP8BOICIP-272 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Cucle-'16(3), Hyderabad- Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax-lV, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND Ml/s. Prabhath Agri Bio Tech Pvt.Ltd., 3-6-168n, Hyderaguda, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. B.SAPNA REDDY, JUNIOR S.G. REP. FOR SRI J V PRASAD, SENIOR S.C. FOR I.T. DEPT. Counsel for the Respondent: The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

THE HONOURABLE SRTJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AIYD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE NARSING R,\O NANDIKONDA ITTA No.256 OF 2Ol2 JUDGMENT,per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, leamed Junior Standing Counsel representing Mr. J.V.Prasad, leamed Senior Slanding Counsel for th,: Income Tax Department for the appellant. Perused the record 2. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income T ax Act, 1961, has brx:n preferred by the Revenue as the appellant against the or<ler dated 08.08.2008 passed by the Incorne Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hyderabad, ln I.T.A.No.94iIl\D/2008 for the Assessment Year 2004-05. 3. Central Iloard of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued ,Sircular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024,, amending the previous ,lircular No.5 of 2024 rjated 15.03.2024,by further enhancing the nronetary limits for filino appeals by the Income Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court t I I I { I

2 To, as a measure for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said Circular, we find that the monetary limit fixed for filing an appeal before the High Court is Rs.2.00 crore. 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.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. However, if the appeal comes within the exception of Circular No.5 of 2024, it would be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revival of the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAO J INT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench'B', Hyderabad The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-'16(3), Hyderabad. One CC to Sri J V Prasad, S.C. for lncome Tax, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies 1. 2. 4. 6 plp \

HIGH COURT' DATED:1810212025 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.256 of 2012 DISMISSING THE APPEAL 'rl U () ., t ? ( 0 7 Airt 2ll5 1lr'5pn1Ct)( -.) l I I I I I I I i I i I l I l I I l I I 1 II lj.,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →