ITO, MADURAI vs. M/S. P. NAVANEETHAKRISHNAN (HUF), MADURAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3148/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 July 2017AY 2008-092 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 found merit in the assessee's submission that the appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the monetary limit stipulated by the CBDT. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was held to be not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an order that treated the sale of land by the assessee as an isolated transaction and not business income. The assessee's representative argued the appeal was not maintainable due to CBDT circulars on monetary limits for appeals.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal based on CBDT circulars regarding monetary limits for filing appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Hearing: 24.07.2017

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Madurai dated 04.03.2016 in for the assessment year 2008-09 passed U/s.250(6) r.w.s. 143(3) & 147 of the Act.

2.

The Revenue has raised several grounds in its appeal, however the crux of the issue is that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the income from sale of land by the assessee is only an isolated transaction and therefore it cannot be considered as business income of the assessee.

3.

At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted before me that the appeal is not maintainable due to the Circular No.21/2013 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the CBDT with respect to monetary limit. Hence, it was pleaded that the appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed. The Ld. DR could not controvert to the submission of the Ld.AR.

4.

After hearing I find merit in the submission of the Ld.AR. The CBDT has directed the Revenue not to file appeal before the Tribunal where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.10 lakhs. In the case of the assessee the tax effect is much less than Rs.10 lakhs stipulated by the CBDT in the circular supra. Therefore, I hereby hold that the appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on the 24th July, 2017.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →