ITO,Ward-1, Proddatur V. Sri K Surendra Reddy, Proddatur

MA 63/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0255 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS MAYA MAHESWARI
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNA L HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO. 63/HYD/2013 ITA NO. 1261/HYD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 PRODDATUR VS. SRI KOPPARTHI SURENDRA REDDY, PRODDATUR PAN: ACZPK5895N APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: MRS. MAYA MAHESWARI RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 05.04.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05.04.2013 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA) BY THE DEPARTMENT IS SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL DATED 26.11.2012. 2. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE OBSERVING THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS AS SUCH THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ACCORDING TO THE D R THE APPEAL FALLS IN THE EXCEPTION AS PER PARA 8(C) OF T HE BOARD INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 9.2.2011 IRRESPECTI VE OF THE MONETARY LIMIT OF TAX EFFECT AS RAP IS INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL. BEING SO, ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS TO BE R ECALLED AND APPEAL HAS TO BE HEARD ON MERIT. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. MA NO. 63/HYD/2013 SRI KOPPARTHI SURENDRA REDDY ====================== 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AT THE TIME OF ORIGINAL HEARING OF THE APP EAL ON 26.11.2012 NOTHING WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD SHOWING AN Y EXCEPTION FOR NON-APPLICATION OF INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 9.2.2011. BEING SO, NOW CONSIDERING THE PLEA OF THE DEPARTMENT AMOUNTS TO REVIEW OF EARLIER ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL WHICH POWER HE TRIBUNAL DOES NOT HAVE U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT. HENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO DISM ISS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 4. IN THE RESULT, MA FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 5 TH APRIL, 2013. SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 5 TH APRIL, 2013 TPRAO COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PRODDATUR 2. SRI KOPPARTHI SURENDRA REDDY, D. NO. 26-870-9, NAGENDRA NAGAR, PRODDATUR, KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. THE CIT(A), GUNTUR 4. THE CIT, TIRUPATI. 5. THE DR B BENCH, ITAT, HYDERABAD.