INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, CUDDALORE vs. MURARY SETTY DURGA MOUNIKA, NEYVELI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1217/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 February 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President)3 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 condoned the delay in filing the appeal. However, it was observed that the tax effect in the appeal was below Rs. 50.00 lakhs, which is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 for filing appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT which was barred by limitation by 87 days. The Revenue sought condonation of delay citing administrative and technical reasons for the delay in filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ (SMC

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH

Hearing: 19.02.2024Pronounced: 19.02.2024

आदेश /O R D E R

1.

This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) vide order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1053620684(1) dated 08.06.2023. The return of income was processed and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) was issued by the Asst. Director of Income

Tax, Central Processing Center (CPC), Bengaluru for the assessment year 2020-21 vide order dated 26.10.2022.

2.

At the outset, it is noticed that this appeal of Revenue is barred by limitation by 87 days. The order of the CIT(A) dated 08.06.2023 was received in the office of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax on 08.06.2023 as per Form 36. The appeal was filed before the Tribunal on 02.11.2023 with a delay of 87 days. The Revenue has filed affidavit for condonation of delay stating that the AO was holding additional charge of administration and therefore, the appeal papers could not be processed in time and also, the delay has occurred due to technical difficulties faced in e-filing of appeal for the first time. It was stated that the delay was unintentional and was beyond the control of AO. We find the cause as reasonable and hence, condone the delay and admit the appeal.

3.

At the outset, it is noticed that the tax effect in this appeal is below Rs.50.00 lakhs and therefore, in view of the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 no appeal should be filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal which has tax effect of Rs. 50.00 lakhs or less and this circular is also applicable retrospectively to all pending appeals. Even on query from the Bench during the course

of hearing, the ld. Senior DR could not point out whether the appeal filed by the Revenue falls under any of the exceptions as provided in Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not-maintainable.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 19th February, 2024 at Chennai.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →