INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(2), HYDERABAD vs. ANJANA MARKETING AGENCIES, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1137/HYD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 August 2018AY 2006-072 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal. This was based on CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, which mandates dismissal of appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakhs.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting a disallowance of Rs. 18,18,195/- made under Section 40(a)(ia). The CIT(A) held that the section was not applicable as the commission was already paid.

What were the issues?

Whether the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) are applicable when commission has already been paid. The appeal was dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD

Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao
For Respondent: Shri R.S Arvindhakshan, Shri S. Rama Rao

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1137/Hyd/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 ITO, vs. M/s Anjana Marketing Ward -9(2), Agencies, Hyderabad Hyderabad.

PAN – AADFA0076B

(Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri R.S Arvindhakshan Assessee by : Shri S. Rama Rao

Date of hearing : 20-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 24-08-2018 ORDER PER P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M.: This is Revenue’s appeal for the A.Y 2006-07 against the order of the CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad dated 07.11.2016. Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. Ld. CIT(A) erred both on facts and law of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 18,18,195/- made u/s 40(a)(ia) holding that provisions of Sec. 40(a)(ia) are not applicable to the facts of the case. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee has already paid the commission and hence the provisions of Sec. 40(a)(ia) are not applicable. 4. Any other ground(s) that may be urged at the time of hearing

2 ITA.No. 1137/Hyd/2017 M/s Anjana Marketing Agencies, Hyderabad. 2. At the time of hearing, it has been brought to our notice that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs. 20 lakhs. On verification of the assessment order, it is noticed that the addition which has been deleted by the CIT(A) is only Rs. 18,18,195/-. In the light of the CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11.07.2018 the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed on account of low tax effect. With the liberty to the Revenue to approach this Tribunal in an M.A if the case falls under any of the exceptions to the above circular.

3.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

Pronounced in the open court on 24th August, 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Hyderabad, Dated: 24th August, 2018 KRK 1) M/s Anjana Marketing Agencies, 17-1-386/SM/ 5 M.N. Reddy Bhavan, Champapet, Hyderabad – 59. 2) ITO, Ward - 9(2), Hyderabad. 3) CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad. 4) Addl.CIT, Range-9, Hyderabad. 5) The Departmental Representative, I.T.A.T., Hyderabad. 6) Guard File.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →