The Commissioner of Income Tax III, vs. M/s. S.V.D. Finvest Pvt. Limited,

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/41/2007HC TelanganaHBHC01031200200726 September 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 Revenue was dismissed based on the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, which amended Circular No. 3 of 2018. This circular enhanced the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department to reduce litigation. The court noted that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 1.00 crore for filing an appeal before the High Court. The court also noted that if the appeal fell within the exceptions under 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?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax III, Hyderabad, filed an appeal before the High Court under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal arose from an order dated 28.04.2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench A, for the Assessment Year 2000-2001. The ITAT's order was preferred against an order dated 29.03.2004 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) IV, Hyderabad, which in turn was against an order dated 28.03.2003 of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. The assessee is M/s. S-V.D. Finvest Pvt. Limited.

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 Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) for filing appeals. The Revenue contended that the appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue did not present any arguments on the merits of the case, relying on the CBDT circulars. The Tribunal had to decide whether the tax effect in the instant appeal was below the monetary limit for filing an appeal before the High Court as per the prevailing CBDT Circulars. The Revenue's argument was implicitly that the appeal was validly filed, but the court's decision was based on the monetary limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[ 3386 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTHREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. LAXMI NARAYANA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEA L No:41 ot2OO7 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260_4 of the lncome Tax Act, ,lg61 arising out of the order of the lncome-Tax Appeflate Tribunar, Hyderabad Bench , A , Hyderabad, in l.T.A.No.487lHydr2004, Assessment year 2000-2001, dated 28-04- 2006, preferred against the order of the commissioner of Income Tax (Appears) rV, Hyderabad, Appeat No.113/AC-3(3yCtT(A)-tV/2003_04, dated:29_03_2004, prefened against the order of the Assistant commissioner of rncome Tax circre-3(3), Hyderabad PAN/GlR No.AACCS8498M / S-69 dated 28_03_2003. Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax lll, Hyderabad ...Appellant AND M/s. S-V.D. Finvest pvt. Limited, 104_105, pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ...Respondent Counsel for the Appefiant: SRI B. SApNA REDDY, SC representing SRt J.V. PRASAD, SC FOR IT DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent: SRI CHALLA GUNARANJAN The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

/:- \ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. LAXMI NARAYANA I.T.T.A. No.41 of 2OO7 JUDGMENT (per llon'ble Sn'Iustice P,SAM KOSHY) Heard Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel representing Sri J. V. Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appearing for the appellant. 2. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been preferred by the Revenue as the appellant against the order dt.28.O4.2OO6 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench A', Hyderabad, in I.T.A.No.487 /Hydl2OO4 for the Assessment Year 2000-0 1. 3. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular No.17 of 2019 dt.O8.08.2019; arnending the previous Circular No.3 of 2018 dt. 1 1.07.20 18, by further enhalcing the monetary lirnits for frling appeals by the Income Ta-x 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 l:.nd that the monetary limit fixed for frling an appeal before the High Court is Rs.1.O0 crore. 4. In the instant appeal, tax effect is well below the monetary limit. 5. Therefore, the appeat filed by the Department is dismissed in terms of tfie aforesaid Circular No.17 of 2019 dt.08.08.2O19. However, if the appeal comes within the exception under paragraph 1O of Circular No.3 of 2018, it

2 would be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revival of the appeal- No order as to costs Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand 6 closed To, kam/SP //TRUE COPY// SD/. K SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR ) oFgc SECT|ON ER I IIE B""il?;lilf3;["":"rrib-unar,.Hyderabad Bench ,A , Hyderabad 3rheA;i#;ft #,;J$iT.""1il".ff * j?"Y;ilr_S,Tirfr1";;,."- 4. one cc to sRrJ.V. pRA:1p,.!c. FoR ffi"Ebi-iil;,.*, to"r"l ?,iS 33 tosRr cHALLA GUNARANJAN:'nIo-,tJiJ ilfpuct r{

HIGH COURT DATED:2610912023 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.41 of 2007 THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED %f;"[T ' rl' . t- ..) 3il stI ?m ' /r/ \

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →