THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
I.T.T.A. No.71 of 2006
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel,
Income Tax Department for the appellant and Mr. Y.Ratnakar,
learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue as the appellant under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (briefly referred to hereinafter as the 'Act'), assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 21.12.2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hyderabad (Tribunal) in I.T.A.No.489/Hyd/2000 for the assessment year 1998-99.
3. In the appeal, the following questions have been proposed as substantial questions of law:
"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case when the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s. 80 IA of I.T. Act vide 2 HCJ & CVBRJ I.T.T.A.No.71 of 2006 intimation u/s.143(1)(a) of I.T. Act relying on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 237 ITR page 134, whether the finding of the Appellate Authority confirmed by the ITAT upholding the said deduction claimed by the assessee based on an earlier contra decision of this Court reported in 174 ITR page 231 is sustainable in law?
2. When the law is settled by the Supreme Court in regard to claim for deduction u/s. 80 IA of the Act vide its judgment reported in 237 ITR page 134 which was pronounced subsequent to filing of return but before processing of return by the Assessing Officer u/s. 143 of I.T. Act whether the findings of the Tribunal and Appellate Authority relying on earlier contra judgment of this Court reported in 174 ITR page 231 are sustainable in law?
3. Whether the respondent assessee is entitled to claim deduction as claimed in his return of income as per Sec. 80 IA of the Act in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court reported in 237 ITR page 134?"
4. On 15.02.2006, the appeal was admitted.
5. Mr. Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that the disputed tax would be below Rs.50 lakhs.
6. In the hearing today, we have perused the assessment order dated 31.03.2000. We find therefrom that the taxable income of the respondent was assessed at 3 HCJ & CVBRJ I.T.T.A.No.71 of 2006 Rs.6,51,42,364.00 and the tax to be paid was quantified at Rs.28,51,426.00.
7. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular No.17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, amending the previous Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, by further enhancing the monetary limits for filing 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 fixed for filing an appeal before the High Court is Rs.1.00 crore.
8. In the instant appeal, tax effect is Rs.28,51,426.00, which is well below the monetary limit.
9. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Department is 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.
4 HCJ & CVBRJ
I.T.T.A.No.71 of 2006
10. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ___________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J Date: 02.11.2022 KL