ITO Ward 2, Karur V. Ram Blue Metals, Karur

MA 205/CHNY/2019

AI Insights

The case involves the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Karur as the petitioner and M/s. Ram Blue Metals as the respondent. Initially, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal due to the low tax effect, not exceeding the monetary limit of ₹50,00,000. However, upon a detailed tax computation presented by the Revenue, it was revealed that the tax effect was indeed above the threshold, involving a significant amount of ₹54,99,019 which was paid by the assessee in violation of section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal, acknowledging this oversight, recalled the earlier order and directed a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 135339 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 02-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 12-08-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect; Tax effect
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member M.P. No.205/Chny/2019 आयकर अपील सं./ [In I.T.A. No.2787/Chny/2018] िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Karur. Vs. M/s. Ram Blue Metals, No. 505, Pavithram (PO), Aravakurichi (Tk), Karur 639 206. [PAN:AAJFR8987L] (Petitioner) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) Petitioner by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 03.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 03.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The Revenue has filed the present Miscellaneous Petition against the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 2787/Mds/2018 dated 24.04.2019 relevant to the assessment year 2011-12. 2. By referring to the miscellaneous petition, the ld. DR has submitted the ITAT has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on low tax effect. By giving a detailed tax computation, the ld. DR has M.P. No.205/Chny/19 2 submitted that the tax effect in the appeal filed by the Revenue is more than the monetary limit of ₹.50,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT and thus, pleaded for recalling the appeal for adjudication. 3. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded the submissions of the ld. DR. 4. We have heard both the parties. We have also perused tax computation furnished by the Department. In the present case, the Revenue Audit Party has pointed out the violations under section 40A(3) of the Act by the assessee and the same has been accepted by the Department Thus, the assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 31.12.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer added ₹.54,99,019/- paid by the assessee which was in violation of the ceiling prescribed under section 40(a)(3) of the Act and therefore, we find that the tax effect in the appeal filed by the Revenue is more than the monetary limit of ₹.50,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT. Thus, we, hereby, recall the order of the Tribunal in I.T.A. No.2787/Chny/2018 dated 24.04.2019 and restore the same for fresh adjudication and direct the Registry to post the appeal for hearing on regular course by issuing notices to both the parties. M.P. No.205/Chny/19 3 5. In the result, the MP filed by the Revenue is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03 rd February, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (G. MANJUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 03.02.2023 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 6. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.