THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. SHRI V. NARAYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/348/2008HC TelanganaHBHC01032331200816 August 2023Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The decision was based on CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which was issued on 08.08.2019 and amended Circular No. 3 of 2018. This circular significantly enhanced the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department before various appellate authorities, including the High Courts, with the aim of reducing litigation. The circular specifies a monetary limit of Rs. 1.00 crore for filing appeals before the High Court. The Court found that the tax effect in the present appeal was well below this prescribed monetary limit. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in terms of the circular. The Court also noted that if the appeal fell within the exceptions mentioned in paragraph 10 of Circular No. 3 of 2018, the Income Tax Department could seek revival of the appeal. No order as to costs was made.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns an Income Tax Tribunal Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Hyderabad (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A'. The appeal pertains to assessment year 1996-97 and challenges an order dated 07-09-2007 passed by the ITAT. The ITAT's order was preferred against an order dated 31-03-2004 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad, which in turn was against an order dated 07-04-2003 of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 6, Hyderabad. The respondent is Shri V. Narayana. The High Court noted that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the monetary limit for filing appeals prescribed by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the monetary limits for filing appeals as per CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. The Revenue, as the appellant, did not present any arguments on the merits of the case. The High Court's decision was based on the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which enhances monetary limits for filing appeals to reduce litigation. The circular sets a monetary limit of Rs. 1.00 crore for appeals before the High Court. The court observed that the tax effect in the instant appeal was below this limit. The respondent, Shri V. Narayana, did not file any submissions as the appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

t 33861 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH 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 INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 348 of 2008 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad in lTA.No.636/Hyd12004, for assessment Year 1996-97 dated.07-09- 2007 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-lV, Hyderabad, Appeal No.97 & 98/Addl.ClT, R-6/C|T(A)-|V/2003-04 dated:31 -O3-2O04, preferred against the Order of the Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax, Range 6, Hyderabad, F.No.Addl.ClT/R-6/Penalties/AC-6(1 y02-03, dated 07-04-2003. Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax-lll, Hyderabad. ...Appellant AND Shri V. Narayana, C/o. M/s. Sri Rama Engineering Construction, 203, Nilgiri, Aditya EnclaVe, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: SRI B. NARASIMHA SARMA, SC FOR lT DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent: SRI CHALLA GUNARANJAN The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOS}IY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHEI]TY I.T.T.A. No.348 of 2OO8 JUDGMENT: per I lon'ble Si Justice p.SAM KOS,Hif) Heard Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, learned coun se for the appellant and Sri Challa Gunaranjan, lcarned counsel for the respondent. 2 . This appeal under Sectio n 260A of the Income ,Iax Act, 196 1, has been preferred by the Revenue as the appellant against the order dt.O7.Og.2OO7 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ,A', Hyderabad, in ITA.No.636/Hydl2OOa for the assessment year 1996-)99,7. 3. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular No.17 of 2019 dt.08.08.2019, amending the previous ,lircular No.3 of 2018 dt. lI.O7.2OL8, by further enhancing the rronetar5z limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court as a measure for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said Circular, we hnd that the monetary limit fixed for filing an appeal before the High Court is Rs. I .00 crore. I I I

2 4. In the instant appeal, ta-x 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 2019 dt.OB.0a.2019. 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, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. // SD/. M. VIJAYA BHAS(ER JOINT REGIYTRAR v/ To, kam //TRUE COPYi/ SECTION OFFICER 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ' A ', Hyderabad 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-lV, Hyderabad. 3. The Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax, Range 6, Hyderabad. 4. One CC to Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, SC for lT Department [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri Challa Gunaranjan, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies tJ

HlGH COURT DATED:1610812023 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.348 of 2008 ITTA IS DISMISSED /, !. ., Fif ill-' ii \).r\ ..,*ts ':; .-tt LI .L i:1! cb\ ..,1 ., . * l'' .-'-?.; ri..rt\" ,1i' \i--.-.:;- .,/ 4l I I 1 l I

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →