ITO, NAMAKKAL vs. S-782, MUDALAIPATTY PACB LTD., NAMAKKAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 947/CHNY/2015Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 July 2015AY 2010-112 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 held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was precluded due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circular for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as non-admitted.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s order allowing deductions under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) to the assessee. The tax effect was ₹3,54,052.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 80P(2)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘ D’ BENCH : CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI]

Hearing: 13.07.2015Pronounced: 13.07.2015

सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 13.07.2015 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.07.2015 आदेश / O R D E R

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Salem, dated 29.01.2015 for the assessment year 2010-2011.

2.

The crux of the ground of the Revenue is that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the deduction claimed by the ITA No.947/Mds/2015 :- 2 -:

assessee u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) and u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3.

None appeared for the assessee. We take up the case to decide on merits after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative. We have gone through the case records. As seen from the order of lower authorities, the tax effect in this appeal is �3,54,052/- which is less than monetary limits fixed by the CBDT to file appeal by the Revenue as per CBDT circular No.5/2014, dated 10th July, 2014 wherein the monetary limit is fixed at �4,00,000/- to file appeal before the Tribunal. Being so, the Revenue authorities are precluded from filing of appeal in this case. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed as non-admitted.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in is dismissed.

Order pronounced on Monday, the 13th day of July, 2015, at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →