Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 153 OF 2006 Appeal Under Section 260 (A) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 27 -11-2003 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench "8" Hyderabad in ITSS A. No. 48/Hyd/2003 for the Block Period 1991-92 to 2000-01 and from 01-04-2000 to 20-07-2000 preferred against the order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax ( Appeals ) / Appellate Assistant Commissioner of lncome - tax dated 16-01-2003 in Appeal No.0175 ICC-4, Hyd/ CIT (A) -l / 02-03 preferred against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax Central Circle -4, Hyderabad in GIR No. S- 708 in PAN No. ACQPMO575 J Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax-lll, Hyderabad., S/o.Gangadhar, Aged Major Owner of Jeep No.AP 25F '1895 R/o.H.No.9-B-134, Gajupet, Nizamabad. ...APPELLANT AND Smt. Surinder Kaur Malhotra, Hyderabad, 8-2-58417, Road No.9, Banjarahills, Hyderabad-34. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI J.V. PRASAD SC FOR l.T. DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent: SRI Y. RATNAKAR The Court delivered the following: Judgment WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEIUBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
I \ THE HON ]:.E THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJ.{L IIHIIYAN AND THE HOT ELE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHAISKAI:]1E]fDY I.T.T.A. No. 153 of 2OO6 JUDGMENT: ee .,e Hon'bte the Chief JLtstice Lljjal Bhuqanl Heard Mr. .t.V.Prasad, learned Standing O,runsel, lncome Tax Departmenl for the appellant and Mr. Y.Iirrt nakzrr, learned counsel for the lspondent. 2. This tppeal has been preferred by the l,:)verrue as the appellant under lt:ction 260A of the Income Tax lrr:t, 1!)6 1 (briefly referred to herr n after as the 'Act'), assailing '1 Le legality and validity of the or 1:r dated 27.I1.2OO3 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribur rl, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hyderalr:rcl (Tribunal) in I.T.S.S.A.No.48/ l1'd/2OO3 for the Block Peri,r,l l99l-92 to 2000-0 1 ancl fro: r O 1.04.2000 to 20.O7 .2OOO 3. Mr. I.V.Prasad, learned Standing l,:ur:rsel fairly submits that ta] elfect in this appeal is belor,r, tlrc nronetar.,r limit for filing appeal. 1 . Cent rl Board of Direct Taxes (CIil) f) has issued Circular No.17 o :'O19, dated 08.08.2019, amendirrg the previous I I
IICJ & CVBRJ I.T.T.A.No.153 of 2006 Circular No.3 of 20 18, dated I1.O7.2OlB, by further enhancing the monetary limits for liling appeals by the Income Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court as a measure for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said circular we find that the monetary limit Iixed for filing 5. Therefore, tl-re appeal filed by the Department 1S dismissed in terms of the aforesaid Circular No.17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019. However, if the appeal comes within the exception under paragraph 10 of Circular No.3 of 2018, it would be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revival of the appeal. No costs. 6. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this appeal shall stand closed. t"'r"dti9['54'U+t-1X //TRUE COPY// "P," SECTION bFFICER To i ] tn" tn*r" Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench "8" Hyderabad z. rne Cor*issionei 6f lncome Tax ( Appeals )-l , Hyderabad . 3. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax Central Circle - 4' HyoeraDao' 4. One Ci to-SRt J.V. PRASAD, S.C' for l.T. Departnment [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRI Y RATNAKAR, Advocate IOPUCI 6. Two CD Copies 2 I PI-P${r an appeal before the High Court is Rs. 1.00 crore. 1
HIGH COUF T DATED:161,, 112022 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.15l of 2006 i::]:: 1 A-l'E C is',! )A \,i ' j $t'lI 1) = .i/ DISMISSIN( i THE ITTA WITHOUT COSl"S 1y