SIDDHANT TRUST,WARDHA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, WARDHA

ITA 273/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 June 2025AY 2023-243 pages

AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that, as per the first schedule to the Finance Act, no surcharge is leviable when the total income does not exceed ₹ 50,00,000/-. Consequently, the tribunal deleted the 37% surcharge levied by the Assessing Officer, finding it to be unwarranted.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Siddhant Trust, challenged orders from the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A) for AYs 2022-23 and 2023-24. The appeals concerned the levy of a 37% surcharge by the Assessing Officer, which was affirmed by the Ld. Commissioner, despite the assessee's total income, including dividend, being ₹ 11,62,190/-, which did not exceed ₹ 50,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether surcharge is leviable on an assessee whose total income, including dividend, does not exceed ₹ 50,00,000/- as per the First Schedule to the Finance Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR "SMC" BENCH : NAGPUR

BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A.No. 272 & 273/NAG/2025 (Assessment Year 2022–23 & 2023–24)

Siddhant Trust Ground Floor, Bachhraj Bhavan Bachhraj Road, Gandhi Chowk Wardha 442 001 PAN : AABAS 6130 P | vs. | ITO, Ward-2(1), Wardha. (Appellant) | (Respondent)

For Assessee : | Ms. Shikha Loya, Ld. CA & Ms. Pranav Padia, Ld.CA (Amicus Curiae) For Revenue : | Shri Surajit Kumar Saha, Ld.Sr.DR

Date of Hearing : | 24.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : | 24.06.2025

ORDER

These appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders each dated 11/03/2025 impugned herein passed by the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A), Jodhpur [in short, "Ld.Commissioner"] u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act") for the Assessment Years (for short, "AY") 2022– 23 & 2023-24 respectively.

The adjournment application filed by the assessee is declined.

- 3. Both the cases are interconnected being pertains to the same assessee and having involved identical issues, and therefore, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this composite order. - 4. Admittedly, the total income of the assessee including by way of dividend is ` 11,62,190/– does not exceed ` 50,00,000/–. Therefore, according to the first schedule to the Finance Act as applicable to the instant case, no surcharge would be leviable and consequently this Court is inclined to delete the surcharge levied by the Assessing Officer @ 37% by considering the income declared by the assessee at MMR, which has been affirmed by the Ld.Commissioner by impugned order. Consequently, both the appeals under are allowed. - 5. In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.06.2025.

/- Sd/- (Narender Kumar Choudhry) Judicial Member

Copy to

//True Copy //

By Order

Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Nagpur Bench.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →