Telangana High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs M/S. Srinivasa Hatcheries Pvt. ... on 2 November, 2022
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
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
