PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 V. M/S.GAYATRI AGRO INDUSTRIAL POWER LTD.

ITTA/388/2018

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, concerning the assessment year 2003-2004. The appeal was dismissed by the High Court of Telangana on the grounds that it did not meet the monetary threshold required for filing an appeal under the specified circular. The court referenced Circular No. 17 of 2016, which set the monetary limit for appeals to the High Court at Rs. 1,00,000. Since the amount in dispute was below this threshold, the appeal was deemed not maintainable.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 735167 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: K MAMATA CHOUDARY
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2003-2004; Income Tax Tribunal Appeal; Monetary limit for filing appeals; Circular No. 17 of 2016
• Section: 260-A

Judgement Text

"[ 3s86 ] IN HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 388 OF 2018 (lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-A of the lncome Tax Act, against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ' A', Hyderabad in ITA No.105/HYD12015, lor assessment Year 2003-2004, dated 15.11.2017, preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax Appeals-V, Hyderabad, Appeal No.022312014-15lDClT, Cir. 9(1/ClT(A)-YlHydl2014-15, dated 18-11-2014, preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax Central Circle 9('l ), Hyderabad. Between: Pr. Commissioner Of lncome Tax-2, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND M/s.Gayatri Agro lndustrial Power Ltd., 8-2-34811,Flat No. 102,Flora Apartments, Road No.3,Banjara Hills, Hyderabad 500034 ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant :Ms. K. MAMATA CHOUDARY Counsel for the Respondent : None appeared The Court made the following: THE HO,N'BLE SRI JUSTII]E P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI .IUSTICE I . LAXMI NARAYANA I.T.T.A. No. 388 of 2Ol8 JU]Q9M.t I$ : fir i t 1 (' I t [, t,, rjr,/r.s ri. €, P\" s,l], I(osfl v,r Heard l 'ls.K.N{i nata, lcarncct Senior Sti-Lnding Courrsr:l .'rppeanng tor I l dr, appcllant. 2. This appr:ai undc;' bcun pref'clrc d by th c dl. 15.' I 2U l l r;assed bv Sectiorr 2tlJA r.r[ the Ineon.re T:rx Act I 96l. has Rr:r,enue as th( appellant ag.atnst the order the lncom!' 'I'ari Appellate Tribunal, Llyderabad l.'l'.A.No 10-ii ilvd/;10 l5 lor the ssessrrrerr'r Yt:ar Bcr.crr'A', i'r-it:rabarl, : l 20cr3 04 l. Ceutral ljoard ,rl [)rr'(.( t 'l'itxcs lCr]l)'-) has rssued (li.r:uiar No l7 of ,lOI!i ot.oti 08 2(ji.i. ilrrncliir!, ttrc prc .iolts Circular No 3 of 20 lu -lt. i i.07.201tj, lr), 6rtrn,-, r-nh:incing thc n1,)nctart liraits f<.r, lihng er1:pea1s Lr-y th(r Incomc 1'ar- I)cp;trrmcnt Lrctbre thc Itrcome'Iax Appellate Tribunals, Hlgh Cor-rrts iir.r'1 .iur-.r r'irrc Courr a.; a rrc