9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (2) TMI 28 - HC - Income TaxVeracity of appeal by revenue - monetary limits for regulating the filing of appeals - insertion of Section 268-A - even though, the instant appeal was filed when S. 268-A had not been inserted, yet since S. 268-A was inserted therein with retrospective effect from 1.4.999, by a deeming fiction of law, the same must be deemed to have been filed when S. 268-A was already a part of the 1961 Act - instant appeal deserves to be dismissed on the basis of the instruction dated 27.3.2000, r.w.s. 268A
Issues Involved:
1. Determination of Income Tax Liability 2. Entitlement to Deduction under Section 80-I of the Income Tax Act, 1961 3. Maintainability of Appeal based on Monetary Limits set by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Determination of Income Tax Liability: The respondent-assessee submitted a return for the assessment year 1988-89, declaring its income at Rs.76,257/-. The Assessing Officer, using powers under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, determined the income tax liability at Rs.1,02,518/-. Dissatisfied with this order, the respondent-assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who partly allowed the appeal and concluded that the respondent-assessee was an industrial establishment entitled to a deduction under Section 80-I of the 1961 Act. The Appellate Authority directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction claim. 2. Entitlement to Deduction under Section 80-I of the Income Tax Act, 1961: The Revenue appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The Tribunal initially allowed the appeal, concluding that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was unjustified in concluding that the respondent-assessee was an industrial undertaking engaged in the processing of "articles" or "things". The Tribunal held that the respondent-assessee was not entitled to deduction under Section 80-I. However, upon a civil miscellaneous application by the respondent-assessee, the Tribunal recalled its order and, upon reconsideration, dismissed the Revenue's appeal, thereby upholding the entitlement to the deduction under Section 80-I. 3. Maintainability of Appeal based on Monetary Limits set by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT): The primary issue of maintainability was raised by the respondent-assessee based on Section 268-A of the 1961 Act and instructions issued by the CBDT, which set monetary limits for filing appeals. The respondent-assessee argued that the appeal by the Revenue violated these instructions, which had acquired statutory status. The Revenue contended that the instructions were directory, not mandatory, and cited exceptions where appeals could be filed irrespective of the monetary limit. The court examined the statutory status of these instructions under Section 268-A, which was inserted into the 1961 Act with retrospective effect from 1.4.1999, giving statutory recognition to instructions fixing monetary limits for filing appeals. The court concluded that Section 268-A and the instructions issued under it are mandatory and binding on the Revenue. The court found that the appeal filed by the Revenue did not meet the monetary limits prescribed by the relevant instructions and did not fall under any exceptions that would allow for an appeal despite the monetary limits. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal based on the preliminary objection raised by the respondent-assessee, holding that the appeal was not maintainable under the instructions and Section 268-A of the 1961 Act.
|
