ALWAR,MUMBAI vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1401/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 July 2024AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal observed that surcharge is leviable only when the income exceeds Rs. 50 Lakhs. Since the assessee's income was Rs. 43,51,640/-, which is less than the threshold, the surcharge was not applicable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's returned income was Rs. 43,51,640/-. The CPC levied surcharge, which the assessee contested. The levy of surcharge is dependent on the total income exceeding certain threshold limits as per the Finance Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the levy of surcharge on the assessee's income of Rs. 43,51,640/- was justified when the threshold for surcharge is Rs. 50 Lakhs.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 111A,Section 112,Section 112A,Section 115BAC,Section 2(31)(vii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parikh, A/R
Hearing: 09/07/2024Pronounced: 09/07/2024

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore, dt. 07/02/2023, pertaining to Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the levy of surcharge amounting to Rs.4,83,032/-.

3.

The total income of the assessee as per the return of income was Rs. 43,51,640/- and the same income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. However, while computing the tax liability, the CPC levied surcharge which is the bone of contention. The quarrel revolves around the first schedule of the Finance Act, 2020, which provides that the amount of income tax shall be increased by surcharge at rates specified therein when the total income exceeds the threshold limits Assessment Year: 2022-23 Alwar i.e., Rs.50 Lakhs/ Rs.1 Crore/Rs. 2 Crores/Rs. 5 Crores. The relevant part of first schedule read as under:- Surcharge on income-tax The amount of income-tax computed in accordance with the preceding provisions of this Paragraph, or the provisions of section 111A or section 112 or section 112A or the provision of section 115BAC of the Income-tax Act, shall be increased by a surcharge for the purposes of the Union, calculated, in the case of every individual or Hindu undivided family or association of persons or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, or every artificial juridical person referred to in sub-clause (vii) of clause (31) of section 2 of the Income-tax Act, (a) having a total income (including the income by way of dividend or income under the provisions of section 111A and section 112A of the Income-tax Act) exceeding fifty lakh rupees but not exceeding one crore rupees, at the rate of ten per cent. of such income-tax:

4.

It can be seen from the above that the surcharge has to be levied only when the income exceeds Rs. 50 Lakhs. As mentioned elsewhere, the returned income of the assessee is Rs.43,51,640/- and the same has been accepted as such and being less than Rs.50 Lakhs, would not attract surcharge. Therefore, the AO is directed to delete the surcharge so levied.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 9th July, 2024 at Mumbai. (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 09/07/2024 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs Assessment Year: 2022-23 Alwar आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

1.

""थ" / The Respondent 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 3. आयकर आयु" अपील

4.

( ) / The CIT(A)- िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 5. गाड" फाई/ Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 111A

All 279 judgments and leading authorities on Section 111A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →