Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee's total income was declared at Rs. 6,77,520/-. The CPC processed the return, levying a surcharge of Rs. 50,224/- and reducing the refund. The Assessee challenged this order before the Ld. Commissioner.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Assessee's income did not exceed the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- for surcharge levy. Although the Ld. Commissioner accepted this, they dismissed the appeal for statistical purposes inadvertently. The Tribunal allowed the appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the levy of surcharge is justified when the Assessee's income does not exceed the prescribed threshold limit, and if the dismissal of appeal for statistical purposes was appropriate.
Sections Cited
250, 143(1), 50, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 10.09.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2023-24.
The Assessee had declared its total income at Rs. 6,77,520/- by filing its return of income on 23.07.2023, which was processed by the CPC vide intimation/order dated 27.05.2024 u/s 143 (1) of the Act and resulted into levy of Surcharge of Rs. 50,224/- and reduction of amount of refund to the tune of Rs. 7,205/- as against the amount of Rs. 59,440/- as claimed by the Assessee.
The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the said intimation/order before the Ld. Commissioner.
Though the Ld. Commissioner accepted the contention of the assessee to the effect that Assessee’s income has not exceeded the threshold limit, as prescribed in the First Schedule of the Finance Act 2022, by which the monetary limit for levy of surcharge is prescribed i.e. exceeding 50,00,000/- as returned income. However, in the last para No.6 of the impugned order, the Ld. Commissioner treated the appeal filed by the assessee as dismissed for statistical purposes.
The Assessee therefore being aggrieved, is in appeal before this court.
Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the Ld. Commissioner considered and accepted the claim of the assessee for not falling within the monetary limit as prescribed for levy of surcharge, in First Schedule of Finance Act 2022, however, may be inadvertently or oversight, the Ld. Commissioner treated the appeal filed by the assessee as dismissed for statistical purposes, instead of allowing the same for statistical purposes. Whatsoever, it may be, the identical issue has also came up for consideration before this Court in a case namely M/s. Lintas Employees Professional Development Trust in the decided on 29/05/2024, wherein the Hon’ble Tribunal while considering the relevant Schedule and Finance Act as involved in this case, ultimately held as under: “As the income of the assessee did not exceed the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- and therefore, levy of such charge is not warranted, as per First Schedule introduced by Finance 2021”.
Considering the peculiar fact to the effect that admittedly the Assessee’s income has not exceeded the threshold limit of Rs. 50 Lakhs as prescribed for levy of surcharge and the judgement of the Hon’ble Tribunal on the identical issue, this court is inclined to allow the appeal filed by the Assessee. Thus, the AO is directed to delete the addition made on account of levy of charge.
In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02.04.2025.