Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. ITW Signode India Limited

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/83/2010HC TelanganaHBHC01027986201017 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. The reasoning was that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the monetary limit of Rs.2.00 crore fixed for filing appeals before the High Court. The Court stated that if the appeal came 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 all pending miscellaneous petitions were to stand closed. The Court did not decide any issue on the merits of the assessment.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Hyderabad, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 23.03.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench 'A'. The ITAT's order pertained to ITA No.560/Hyd/2002 for Assessment Year 1996-97. The appeal was preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) I, Hyderabad, which in turn was against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-III, Hyderabad. The assessee is ITW Signode India Limited. The High Court noted that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) had issued Circular No.9 of 2024, amending Circular No.5 of 2024, to enhance monetary limits for filing appeals. The monetary limit for filing an appeal before the High Court was fixed at Rs.2.00 crore.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court given the amended monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT. The Revenue argued that the appeal was filed in accordance with the then-prevailing rules and procedures. The Revenue contended that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the enhanced monetary limit of Rs.2.00 crore stipulated by CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024. The Revenue did not present any arguments on the merits of the case, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of the monetary limit. The Assessee did not record any arguments in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

134471 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA lncome tax Trrbunal 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 ITA No.560/Hydl02 lor Assessment Year 1996-97 dated 23-03-2007 ' preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) l, Hyderabad dated 08-03-2002 in Appeal No. 04/Tr./CC-lll/C|T(A)-U99-00, preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle-lll' Hyderabad dated 30-03-1999 in PAN/GlR No.N-S/CC-|ll/Hyd. Between: Commissioner of lncome Tax-ll, Hyderabad. ...APPellant AND ITW Signode lndia Limited, [Formerly ITW Signode lndia Ltd] O/o.3'd Floor, Itlerchant Towers, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ...Respondent Gounsel for the Appellant: Ms. J. Sunitha, Junior Standing Counsel representing Mr. P. Murali Krishna Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Karthik Ramana Puttamreddy The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT I ITTA No: 83 of 2010

it I ) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKOI\DA ITTA No.83 OF 2010 JUDGMENT': (pcr Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) I{eard Ms. J. Sunitha, leamed Junior Standing Counsel representing Mr. P.Murali Krishna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the appellant and Mr. Karthik Ramana Puttamreddy, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the record. 2. 1-his appeal under Section 260,{ of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been preferred by the Revenue as the appellant against the order dated 23.03.2007 passed by the Income 'l'ax Appellate Tlibunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad, ln I.T.A.No.560/Hydl2002 for the Assessment Year 1996-97 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 fu*her enhancing the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department before the I I Income Tax Appellate Tribu4als, High Courts and Suprerne Court

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 seek revival ofthe appeal. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall -z._ Sd/. K. SRINIV RAO JOINT REG TRAR //TRUE COPY// To, sEcTtoN oFFtcER 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench A, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) l, Hyderabad. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Centril Circle_lll, Hyderabad. 4. One CC to Mr. P. Murali Krishna Advocate tOpUCI 5. One CC to Mr. Karthik Ramana puttamreddy, Advocate tOpUCl 6, Two CD Copies Kanr./PSL I No.5 of 2024, it would be open to the Income Tax Department to stand closed. +r

HIGH COURT DATED:1710212025 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.83 of 2010 DISMISSING OF THE APPEAL W I t a6' 5 r c 1 n6 R P 6 A 1 o 2o @

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 →