ITO CORP WARD 2 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ESKAY CARTONS (P) LTD, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 417/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 June 2025AY 2005-06Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi (Judicial Member), Shri Jagadish (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeal was not maintainable due to low tax effect, citing a CBDT circular. The assessee's MA was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2005-06. The assessee also filed a Miscellaneous Application against a previous Tribunal order. The Revenue's appeal was taken up first.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of Revenue's appeal due to low tax effect and dismissal of assessee's Miscellaneous Application.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

Hearing: 11.06.2025Pronounced: 11.06.2025

Heard together (3 matters)

I.T.A. No.417/Chny/2018
M.A. No. 182/Chny/2022
ITA No. 78/Chny/2011

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s. Eskay Cartons (P) Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of No. 6 & 8, Cenotaph 1st Street, Income Tax, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Company Circle II(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) Department by : Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT Assessee by : Shri K. Ravi, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 11.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the Appellant-Revenue is directed against the order dated 12.11.2013 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) II, Chennai for the assessment year 2005-06.

& M.A. No. 182/Chny/22 2. Since both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee pertains to same assessee, with the consent of both the parties, both the appeal and MA were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

4.

When the appeal was taken up for hearing, the ld. DR Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT filed written submissions dated 09.06.2025 and submits that as per CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024, the appeal filed by the Appellant-Revenue may not be maintainable due to low tax affect against which the ld. AR Shri K. Ravi, Advocate furnished tax computation and on perusal of the same at pages 2 & 3 of the written submissions, we note that the tax effect in the present appeal is less than the monetary limit of ₹.60,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT to file an appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal as per the CBDT Circular No. 09/2024, dated 17.09.2024. Thus, the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. However, the Appellant - Revenue is at liberty to recall, if any, prejudice caused by appropriate manner. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

& M.A. No. 182/Chny/22 M.A. No. 182/Chny/2022 : AY 2005-06 5. When the Miscellaneous Application is taken up for hearing, we note that the assessee filed the M.A. against the order of the Tribunal in dated 17.04.2015, which was passed against the revision order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. We find that the assessee filed present MA with a delay of 2592 days without filing condonation petition. The appeal preferred by the Appellant-Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A) passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act dated 12.11.2013 has been dismissed hereinabove due to low tax effect, the MA filed by the assessee is mere academic and thus, dismissed as infructuous.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the MA filed by the assessee are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 11th June, 2025 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →