ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. SHRI. V. ANANTHA KUMAR, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1441/BANG/2015Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 November 2016AY 2005-064 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the revenue's appeal was not maintainable for two reasons: it was a duplicate appeal, and it suffered from a low tax effect, which was below the threshold stipulated by the CBDT circular.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2005-06. The assessee argued that the appeal was not maintainable as a similar appeal by the revenue for the same year and order was already dismissed by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of the revenue's appeal due to it being a duplicate filing and having a low tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI A. K. GARODIA & SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, C. A
For Respondent: Shri H. Ananda, I.R.S

O R D E R PER SHRI A.K.GARODIA, AM

This is revenue’s appeal directed against the order of learned CIT (A), 2, Bangalore dated 02.06.2015 for A. Y. 2005 – 06.

2.

Learned DR of the revenue supported the assessment order.

Learned AR of the assessee submitted that this appeal filed by the revenue is not maintainable because for the same year against the same order of CIT (A) an appeal was filed by the revenue and the same was dismissed by the Tribunal in dated 06.01.2016. He submitted a copy of this tribunal order. He pointed out that as per this tribunal order, the appeal of the revenue was dismissed for low tax effect in view of Board Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 as per which, appeal of the revenue is not maintainable before the tribunal if tax effect is below Rs. 10 Lacs. He submitted that in any case, this appeal of the revenue should be dismissed as not maintainable for low tax effect also. Learned DR of the revenue had nothing to say in reply.

3.

We have considered the rival submissions and we find force in both submissions of the learned AR of the assessee because we find that this appeal of the revenue is not maintainable for both reasons that this appeal is a duplicate appeal because an appeal was filed by the revenue earlier also, which is already dismissed by the tribunal and secondly, the appeal of the revenue is not maintainable on account of low tax effect because the only addition made by the A. O. after reopening the assessment u/s 147 was of Rs. 926,392/- being deduction u/s 10B which has been deleted by CIT (A) and the appeal is filed by the revenue before the tribunal. Hence this is apparent that the tax effect is below Rs. 10 Lacs. We therefore, dismiss the appeal of the revenue for both these reasons and observe that the revenue should take care and should not file duplicate appeals.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

Sd/- Sd/- (SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN (A.K. GARODIA) JUDICAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Place: Bangalore: D a t e d : 03.11.2016 am* Copy to : 1 Appellant 2 Respondent 3 CIT(A)-II Bangalore 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6 Guard file By order

AR, ITAT, Bangalore

1.

ौुतलेख क� तार�ख……………………………………………………………………… DATE OF DICTATION……………………………………………………………………… 2.तार�ख, �जस पर टाइप �कया हुआ मसौदे, संबंिधत सदःय के सामने रखा गया ह� DATE ON WHICH TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER……………………………………………………………………………………….. 3. तार�ख �जस पर अनुमो�दत मसौदे व.िनजी सिचव/िनजी सिचव के पास वापस आए DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE PS/Sr.PS……………….

4. घोषणा के िलए आदेश संबंिधत सदःय के सामने रखने क� ितिथ DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT……………………………………………………………………………… 5. आदेश िन.सिचव/व.िन.सिचव के पास वापस आने क� ितिथ DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER COMES BACK TO THE PS/Sr.PS…………………….. 6 आदेश अपलोड करने क� ितिथ DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE………………………………………….. 7. अगर अपलोड नह�ं �कया तो, उसका कारण IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO…………………………. 8. ब�च िल�पक के पास फाइल जाने क� ितिथ DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK……………………………….. 9. आदेश ज़ेरो�स/पृ�ांकन के िलए भेजने क� ितिथ DATE ON WHICH ORDER GOES FOR XEROX &ENDORSEMENT……………………… 10. फाइल मु�य िल�पक के पास जाने क� ितिथ DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK………………………………… 11. आदेश पर हःता�र के िलए फाइल सहायक र�जःशार के पास जाने क� ितिथ THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER………………………………………………………………………….

12.

अिधकरण आदेश के ूेषण के िलए फाइल ूेषण �वभाग म� जाने क� ितिथ THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO DESPATCH SECTION FOR DESPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER……………………………………………………………………………

13.

आदेश क� ूेषण क� ितिथ DATE OF DESPATCH OF ORDER…………………………………………………………………….

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →