Dy.CIT, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad V. Sri Tarigopula Venkatappa, Hyderabad

ITA 664/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 69724 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMISHA S GUPT
• Assessee Lawyers: V RAGHAVENDRA RAO
• Keywords: Tax effect; Revised return
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 664/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, APPELLAN T CIRCLE 6(1), HYDERBAD. VS. SRI TARIGOPULA VENKATAPPA, RESPONDENT HYDERABAD. (PAN AAWPT7590E) APPELLANT BY : SMT. AMISHA S. GUPT RESPONDENT BY : V. RAGHAVENDRA RAO DATE OF HEARING : 13/08/2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13/08/ 2013 ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, A.M.: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-IV, HYDERABAD, DATED 13/02/201 3 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS AP PEAL: 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FAC TS. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE NOTICED THAT TH E ALTERNATIVE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS DE BATABLE ONE, CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED U/S 154 OF THE IT ACT. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE RECOGNIZED THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE I.E. AWARE VS. DCIT [2003] 263 IT R 13(A)] RELIED ON BY THE CIT(A) IS DISTINGUISHABLE TO THE F ACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. 2 ITA NO. 664/HYD/13 SRI TARIGOPULA VENKATAPPA 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DENIED THE CLAI M OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 35AC, SINCE SUCH A CLAIM IS MAINTAINABLE IF AT ALL THE SAME IS MADE BY FILING A REVISED RETURN OF INCOME. 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE NOTICED THAT AL TERNATIVE CLAIM, IF ANY CAN BE CLAIMED BY FILING OF REVISED R ETURN OF INCOME AND SHOULD HAVE APPRECIATED THE RATIO OF JUD GMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF GEOTZ(INDI A) LTD. [284 ITR 323], WHICH WAS DELIVERED SUBSEQUENT TO TH E DECISION OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF AP. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE ORDE RS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT, AFTER GIVING APPEA L EFFECT, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REV ENUE IS LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS AND THIS POSITION HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED EVEN BY THE LEARNED DR. AS PER THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 20 11 ISSUED ON 09/02/2011, THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING OF AN APP EAL BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN REVISED TO RS. 3 LAKHS. AS DECIDED BY THE CBDT, APPEALS SHALL NOT BE FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN CASES WHERE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEE D RS. 3 LAKHS. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MADHUKAR INAMDAR (HUF ) 318 ITR 149, THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT CB DT INSTRUCTION FIXING ANY MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING TH E APPEAL WOULD APPLY EVEN FOR THE PENDING CASES. KEEPING IN VIEW T HE SAID DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND T HE BOARD INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 09/02/2011, WE HOLD THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT INVOLVING TA X EFFECT OF LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND THE SAME I S, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 3 ITA NO. 664/HYD/13 SRI TARIGOPULA VENKATAPPA 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13/08/2013 UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (CHA NDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 13 TH AUGUST, 2013. KV COPY TO:- 1) DCIT, CIRCLE 6(1), 7 TH FLOOR, D BLOCK, IT TOWERS, MASAB TANK, HYDERABAD. 2) SRI TARIGOPULA VENKATAPPA, 6-3-609/114, ANAND NAGAR COLONY, KHAIRATABAD, HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT (A)-IV, HYDERABAD. 4) THE CIT-III, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD