Itta/148/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyd v. Ms. Rani R.lulla Hyderabad
High Court
20 Mar 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/148/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyd v. Ms. Rani R.lulla Hyderabad
Date of order
20 Mar 2014
Assessment year(s)
1984-85, 1989-90, 1988-89
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/148/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyd v. Ms. Rani R.lulla Hyderabad, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: As a sequel to the dismissal ofthe appeal, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of asinfructuous.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH&HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
I.T.T.A.No.148 of 2003
JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Challa Kodanda Ram )
Heard Sri S.R.Ashok, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income-taxand Sri AVA Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the sole respondent.2. This Appeal is filed by the Revenue under Section 260(A) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) challenging the order dated12.12.2002 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench-A,Hyderabad in I.T.A.No.373/Hyd/1996 relating to the assessment year 1984-85.3. As a matter of fact, we noticed that in ITTA No.90 of 2001, in relation toMs.Rani R. Lulla, for the assessment year 1989-90 and in ITTA No.116 of 2001in relation to Sri Srichand T. Lulla, for the assessment year 1988-89 weredismissed by this Court by common judgment dated 03-02-2012 on the groundthat the tax liability involved in the appeals being below the prescribed limits forfiling the appeals by the Department/appellant in terms of the circular issued inexercise of powers conferred under Section 268-A of the Income Tax Act,1961. 4. Considering the departmental circular issued by theDepartment and in the light of Section 268-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, thisCourt, by order dated 24.01.2014 in W.T.A.No. 24 of 2004 and batch, took aview that the appeals, where the tax effect is below the monetary limitsprescribed in the Circular, need to be dismissed.
5. In the light of the above decision, we see from the order of assessmentthat the tax liability was determined at Rs.17,128/-. In view of the fact that thequantum of liability involved in the present case being less than the amountspecified in the Circular issued by the Department, we are not inclined toexamine the appeal on merits.
6. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to the dismissal ofthe appeal, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of asinfructuous. No order as to costs.
___________________
G. CHANDRAIAH, J
Dated: 20.03.2014
_____________________
Nrg CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH&
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
NRG
I.T.T.A.No.148 of 2003
20.03.2014
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.