9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Dispute over filing fee for appeal before the Appellate Tribunal - Treatment of investment subsidy by the assessee as capital receipt Analysis: - Issue 1: Dispute over filing fee for appeal before the Appellate Tribunal The appeal and cross-objection were filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee remitted a filing fee of Rs. 500, but the registry raised an objection, requiring Rs. 10,000 as the filing fee. The dispute arose due to the interpretation of section 253(6) of the Act, which specifies the fee based on the total income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that as the assessed income exceeded Rs. 2 lakhs, the filing fee should be one percent of the assessed income or Rs. 10,000, whichever is less. Therefore, the assessee was directed to pay the balance fee of Rs. 9,500 for the appeal to be admitted. - Issue 2: Treatment of investment subsidy by the assessee as capital receipt The assessee had received an investment subsidy from the State Government, treating it as capital in nature. However, the Assessing Officer adjusted the subsidy amount against the cost of factory building and plant and machinery, reducing the cost of those assets and granting depreciation on the reduced value. This led to the assessee incurring a loss due to the differential depreciation amount. The rectification petition filed by the assessee under section 154 was dismissed by the assessing authority and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Tribunal noted that the appeal, though arising from proceedings under section 154, was essentially against the assessment order, making it a quantum appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that the filing fee for the appeal should be determined based on the assessed income, which in this case exceeded Rs. 2 lakhs, warranting a fee of Rs. 10,000. - The Tribunal referenced the judgment of the Bombay High Court in a similar case, emphasizing that the assessed income determines the fee payable, regardless of the issue raised in the appeal. Despite the different context, the court's analysis of section 253(6) highlighted the significance of the assessed income in fee determination. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the assessee must pay the required filing fee to proceed with the appeal and cross-objection. Failure to do so would render the appeal non-maintainable. The case was scheduled for hearing, with notice waived, and the order was pronounced on a specified date.
|
