SGJ ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,PATIALA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal could not be dismissed on technical grounds and the assessee was eligible for the concessional tax rate of 25% based on their turnover. The AO was directed to recalculate the tax payable.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed their return of income declaring Rs. 60.45 Lacs and claimed a concessional tax rate of 25%. The CPC processed the return at a normal rate of 30% and rejected a subsequent rectification application. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on technical grounds.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal could be dismissed on technical grounds and if the assessee was eligible for a concessional tax rate of 25% based on turnover.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/s SGJ Enterprises Private Limited DCIT-Circle Patiala बनाम/ D-197 Focal Point Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Patiala 147001 Patiala �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AANCS-8860-N (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 22-05-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 02-06-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2020- 21 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Fearless Appeals Centre Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 22- 12-2023 in the matter of rectification intimation issued by CPC u/s 154 of the Act on 21-06-2022. The sole grievance of the assessee is application of correct rate of tax. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under. The registry has noted delay of 93 days in the appeal which stands condoned.
It emerges that the assessee being resident corporate assessee filed return of income on 22-12-2020 declaring income of Rs.60.45 Lacs. The CPC processed the same u/s 143(1) and applied normal tax rate of 30% as applicable to companies. On the other hand, the assessee had applied concessional rate of 25%. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred rectification u/s 154 which was also rejected by CPC vide intimation dated 21-06-2022. The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal on the ground that the assessee could have filed appeal against intimation u/s 143(1) but the assessee filed appeal against intimation order issued u/s 154. The original cause arises at the stage of proceedings u/s 143(1) and accordingly, the issue could not be adjudicated in the present appeal. In the result, the appeal was dismissed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.
We are of the opinion that separate cause of action had arisen for the assessee i.e., first against intimation passed u/s 143(1) and secondly, against rectification intimation passed u/s 154. Both intimations are appealable before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the appeal could not be dismissed merely on technical ground and the appellate door could not be shut against rectification intimation. Having said so, we find that the lower rate of tax was not claimed by the assessee u/s 115BAA but the assessee has claimed general concessional rate of tax of 25% which was applicable to all corporate assessee having turnover of less than Rs.250 Crores during previous year 2016-17. The Ld. AR has placed on record financial statements for FY 2016-17 which would indicate that the turnover of the assessee, in this year, is merely Rs.2.07 Crores. Accordingly, the assessee is eligible to claim concessional basic rate of tax of 25%. Therefore, Ld. AO is directed to make correct computations of tax payable by the assessee. The basic rate of tax as applicable to the assessee would be 25%. We order so.
The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 02-06-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 02-06-2025 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT, CHANDIGARH
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026