Director of Income Tax [Exemptions] V. Exhibition Society

ITTA/573/2006

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Department against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, which was itself an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The dispute originated from an assessment year 2001-02. The primary legal issue was whether the appeal should proceed given the monetary limits set by the CBDT to reduce litigation. The Department argued for the appeal's continuation despite the monetary limit, citing potential exceptions under the relevant CBDT circulars.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 719908 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: C P RAMASWAMI
• Assessee Lawyers: A RADHA KRISHNA
• Keywords: Appeal; CBDT Circular; Income Tax; Monetary limit
• Section: 260-4

Judgement Text

"[ 3386 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 573 of2006 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the order of the lncome{ax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench'A' Hyderabad, in |.T.A.No.871/HYD/2001, dated 31-03-2005, Assessment Yeat 2OO1- 02 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appealsll, Hyderabad, ITA No.0022/ADIT (E)-UCIT(A)/04-05 dated:2O-O7-2OO4, preferred against the Order of the Assistant Director of lncome Tax (Exernptions)-1, Hyderabad GIR No.E-3/ADIT (E)-1,Hyd , dated 26-03-2004 Between: Director of lncome Tax (Exemptions), A.P. Olympic Bhavan, lnside L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND Exhibition Society, Exhibition Grounds, Mukramjahi Road, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI A. RADHA KRISHNA Sr SC For lT DEPT Gounsel for the Respondent: SRI C.P. RAMASWAMI The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HOT{OURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSI{Y AND THE HONOT'RABLE SRI WSTICE IIIXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY I.T.T.A.No.573 of 2O06 JIIDGMENT:Ir er Hon'ble Si itstice P.SAD KOSHY) Heard Mr. A. Radha Krishna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, for the appellant and Mr. C.P. Ramaswami, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act, 196 1, has been preferred by the Revenue as the appellant against the order dt.31.03.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad, in lTA.No.87 I /Hyd/2OO4 for the assessmenr vea:. 2OOt 02. 3. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant contended that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular No.17 of 2019 dr.O8.O8.2Ot9, amending the previous Circular No.3 of 2018 dt. It.O'/.2018, by further enhancing the monetar5r limits for filing appeal by the Income Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court as a measu re for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said Circular, the rnonetary 2 limit frxed for hling an appeal before the High Court is Rs'1'OO 4. In the instant appeal, the tax effect is well below the monetarY limit. 5. Therefore, the appeal frled by the Department is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid Circular No 17 of 2019 dt'08'Oa'2019' However, if the appeal comes within the exception under paragraph 1O of Circular No'3 of 2018' it would be open to the IncomeTaxDepartmenttoseekrevivaloftheappeal.Noorder crore. as to costs. kam ,?l\"rc*, 6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall stand closed SD/JK.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/i SECTI OFFICER to'1. ,rr\" ln@me-tax Appellate Tribunal' Hyderabad Bench ' A ' Hyderabad' ,. il;;;;i\"sioner'of lncome Tax (Appeals)-l' Hvderabad' 3. The Assistant Oi'\"cto' oi f n\"ome Tax (Exemptrons)-l' Hyderabad' 4. one CC to sRl A' nno\"nn xirsnuA''senioi SC FoR lr DEPARTMENT toPUCI s. bl\"tt to SRI c.P RAMASWAMI' Advocate [oPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies HIGH COURT DATED:0911012023 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.573 of 2006 THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED P/'1q, 3t ro 13' E( Ir.T E OF )' ({ $tr C) 'i) .:a +, it :) '.) .,. 'll n- ' : t 4, "