THE COMMI.OF INCOME TAX,HYD. V. JAIHIND CYCLE COMP.HYD.

ITTA/58/2001

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax, A.P. -1, Hyderabad against M/s Jaihind Cycle Company concerning the assessment years 1993-94 to 1997-98. The appeal was initially allowed in part by the High Court but was later set aside by the Supreme Court, which remanded the matter back to the High Court for de novo consideration. The primary legal issue revolved around the monetary threshold for filing appeals, as stipulated by recent circulars from the Department of Revenue. The court's decision to dismiss the appeal was influenced by the updated monetary limits intended to reduce litigation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 720138 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-08-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: S RAVI KIRAN
• Assessee Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Year; Circular No. 17 of 2019; Income Tax; Tax effect; Tax effect
• Section: 2604

Judgement Text

"[3386 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 58 of 2001 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A'Hyderabad, in lT (SS) A.No.84/HYD/'1998, for Assessment year 1993-94 to 1997-98 dated:'19-06-2000, preferred against the Order of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle -6(4), Hyderabad, P.A.N / G.l_R No. J-3O4, dated 28-11-97. Between: Commissioner of lncome Tax, A.P. -1, Hyderabad ...Petitioner AND M/s Jaihind Cycle Company, Siddiambar Bazar, Hyderabad. ... Responde nt Counsel for the Appellant: SRI J.V.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent: SRI S. RAVI, Senior Counsel for SRI CH. PUSHYAM KIRAN The Court delivered the foltowing: JUDGMENT THE TION'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSITT AND THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY I. T.T.A No.58 of 2001 JUDGMENI:rD,-: t tbti ))1,. ::)t,ttt.:,., p.sAM KOsHy) This r.ourt hit-s lirkcn trl; rhis lr.rtter under thc caption ,for berng rne.tro'ecl .s tl.rc rcmlrrtrl ol tirc. mirttcr by thc SLrpremc Court,Jas not recordcd ir-r our carlrcr orcl(,r (lirte(i 09 0g.2023. Therclore, order passed by this Court on 09.08.202:l in Ll)e prcsent appcal is reca_lled ancl the foliowing orclcr is ltcing prtssc cl rleard Sri ..t !. I;1.n5,,.1 for the appcilant. lcar nccl Senior Stancling Counsel appcaring I t 2 k thc Outs('t' rr !s to r)c 1r'i)Lc(l tr.rat this appi:al was alowcd in parr by thrs Corrrr vrcit. judgt.ncnt darcd tf).O7.2014. Aggrrcvecl by the said judgmcnr, the rcspondcnl approrrchcd thc llon,ble Supreme Court b]. filing Civil Appeal No. 10235 of 20l6 ar-ising our ol Special kave petition (C) No.31gg of 2015. Therc'upon, thr: I.lonble Suprt:nre Cortrt set aside the judgment dated 16.O7.2O).4 arrl rernrurdt,d tltr- p211.; to this Court vide order dated 21.1O.2O16 lor de novo corrsrclcr;rtiotr. I 3. This appcal unclcr Scctron 26O4 ol thc Incomc .l.ax Act, been preferrcd by thc Rcvenrrt. as thc appcllant against dt.19.06.2000 Passed l;r. thc hrcornc f.iu Appellate .l.ribunal. i961, has the order Hyderabad Bench 'A', I,yderab:rci. rn L.l.(SS)i .No,g a lHyc)/l99g tbr the Assessmcnr year 1993-94 ro I997 9r3 -|-.' 4. 'l-odar., rihCr.t thc nlatter ls ialiclt itI for i-cat- ng. Ie, nt.cl Scirior st.and.ing courrsci ;tppeeu ir.rg tbr trrc Deprr-tnrent sur)rnits that r,ire cclrlr.rl lloard ol Dircct Ta.les (CRDT) has; is;sut:d Crrcular No. l7 of .10 I 9 dt.08.08.20 !9, amcnding rhe prcr,.ious Circuiar No.3 ot20lg.jt.l1.O7.2(r18, bv f11g1,.r. cnhancirrg the mc.rretarv limits for liring appeals bv thc Ir.rc.rre Tax Deparrmcnt before the Incorre Tax Appciiare Tribunals, I{igh Cour ts and Sultrcme Oorrrt as a measure ibr reducing the littgation. tn par-ag-aph 2 of thc said Cirr:rrlirr, rve find th:rt the morlcta4, Iimit fixed for filing an appcal bctore tlte I Iigh t)ou: t is Rs. i.OO crrrrc. 5. In the ilrstant appeal. tax effect is wcll bekru; Lhc rnonetan. Iinrit 6. Thercfore. thc appeal filed by the Depaltmen'. is dismissed in Lerms o[ the aforcsaid (.ir.ular N.. r7 .f 20 i!j dr.08.ou.20 19 However. ir the aJrpcid coqr<--s rrirhin thc cxception rrrrdcr paragraph lo .f circular No.ll ot 20 tE. rr rvould be opcn to rhe Inconre T.u( Department to seek revival of the appeal. No oldcr as to r-rosls. Consequcntly, mrscellaleous petitlons pending. if zrry. shaJl stzrrrl closed ,TRUE COPY// Sd/.M.VIJAYA BHASKAR JOINT-R,EGISTRAR secnLffiorrrcen To, '1 . The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal' Hyderabad Bench 'A' Hyderabad 2. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax' Circle -6(4)' Hyderabad' 3. One CC to SRI J.V.PRASAD, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRI CH. PUSHYAM KIRAN, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD CoPies katn HIGH COURT PSK,J & LNA,J DATED:0910812023 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.58 of 2001 ITTA IS DISMISSED . .i- : ., ) ..1..,/' -.r'. , SiAfF oF /X ?5 SEP ?M i 5 b)-) j) 1) "