COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -III vs. M/S. SARO POWER AND INFRASTRUCFTURE LTD.,

ITTA/306/2012HC TelanganaHBHC01024839201218 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 due to the tax effect being well below the monetary limit of Rs. 2.00 crore for filing appeals before the High Court, as stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024. The Court referenced paragraph 2 of the circular, which specifies this limit. The reasoning is based on the CBDT's initiative to reduce litigation by setting enhanced monetary thresholds for appeals. The operative direction is the dismissal of the appeal. The Court also noted that if the appeal fell within any exceptions mentioned in Circular No. 5 of 2024, the Revenue could seek revival. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the appeal was disposed of on a procedural ground.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Hyderabad, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 25.10.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench 'A'. This order pertained to Assessment Year 2007-08 and was preferred against an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad, which in turn was against an assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. The respondent in the appeal is M/s. Saro Power And Infrastructure Limited. The High Court noted that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024 for filing appeals before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court given the monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, presented the appeal for consideration. The judgment does not explicitly record any specific arguments made by the Revenue regarding the maintainability or merits of the appeal, other than filing it. However, the Revenue is the appellant, implying they sought to challenge the ITAT's order. The Revenue relied on the fact that they had filed the appeal, which was then subject to the High Court's review based on procedural guidelines. The primary issue revolves around the applicability of the monetary limits set by CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024, which amended Circular No. 5 of 2024, for filing appeals before the High Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

t34471 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 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 306 OF 2012 Appeal filed under Section 260(A) of the Income-Tax Act., 1961 , against the order dated 25-10-2011 passed in lTA. No.695/Hyd 12011 for the assessment year 2OO7 -2008 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 31-01-2011 passed in lTA.No. ',! 294lDcff 3(1yClT(A)-lV/09-1 0 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-lV, Hyderabad preferred against the Assessment Order dated 08-12-2009 passed in PAN/GIR No. AAECS8030F on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of . lncome Tax, Circle-3(1 ), Hyderabad. Between: Commissioner of lncome Tax -lll, lT Towers, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad ,..APPELLANT AND M/s. Saro Power And lnfrastructure Ltimited, 19-2-21712, MirAlam Tan Road, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, Junior Standing Counsel representing Sri J.V.Prasad, Senior Standing Counsel Counsel for the Respondent: - The Court delivered the following JUDGMENT: *r I I I

I .j JUDGME,N t Qrcr Hon'ble Sri ,Iustice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel representing Mr. J.V.Prasad, leamed Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the appellant. Perused the record. 2. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been preferred by the Revenue as the appellant against the order dated 25.10.201 I passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A' , Hyderabad, 1lr LT.A.No.695/HYD/201 I for the Assessment Year 2007-08. 3. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, amending the previous Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, by further enhancing the monetary limits for filin11 appeals by the Income Tax Department before the I / \ Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court I THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA ITTA No.306 OF 2012 I

2 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 JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER '1 . The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-lV, Hyderabad 3. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad' 4. One CC to Sri J.V.Prasad, SC for lncome Tax Department [OPUCI 5 Two CD CoPies To, VHgh I \,*lt w \

HIGH COURT DATED: 1810212025 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.306 of 2012 DISMISSING ITTA 24 utlil 2m * t :i t1C 1 t c .D 1 )co Y \ I

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →