Itta/239/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii, Hyderabad v. M/S Venkateswara Hatcheries Ltd., Hyderabad

1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBERrWO IHOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V, BHASKAR REDDY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 239 OF 2005 Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act 1961 againstthe order dated 26-10-2005 in ITA No. 341/ Hydl 2002 (Asst. Year 1998-99 ) onthe file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench - B,the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench - B,Hyderabad preferred against the order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) lV, Hyderabad dated 31-01-2002 in Appeal No. 343/JCSR - 5 / CtTAppeals) lV, Hyderabad dated 31-01-2002 in Appeal No. 343/JCSR - 5 / CtT(A) -lV / 01-02 preferred against the order of the Additional Commissioner oflncome Tax Special Range -5 , Hyderabad dated 2910112001 in PAN No. , GIR No. V -'14.V7247H, GIR No. V -'14. Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax-lll, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND lr//sVenkateswara Hatcheries Ltd., 3-5-808 & 808/1, Hyderguda, Hyderabad - 500o29 Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. B. SAPNA REDDY, REPRESENTINGSRI J,V.PRASAD SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPT. Counsel for the Respondent: SRI Y. RATNAKAR The Court delivered the following: Judgment ,: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDYI.T.T.A. No.239 of 2006 JUDG!4ENI: eer ttte Hon ble the Chief Justice tljjal Bhugan) Heard Ms. Sapna Reddy, learned counsel representing onbehalf of Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel, Income TaxDepartment for the appellant 2. This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue as theappellant under Section 26OA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (brieflyreferred to hereinafter as the Act'), assailing the legality andvalidity of the order dated 26.10.2005 passed by the Income TaxApprellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ts', Hyderabad (Tribunal) inITA l\o.3a1lHyd,/2002 for the assessment year l998-99. 3. Ms. SapnrL Reddl , iearned counsel fairly submits that taxeffect in this appezrl is be1ou, the monetary limit for filing appeal. 4. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issuedCircular No.17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, amending the previousCircular No.3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, by further enhancing themonetary limits for l-rling appeals by the Income Tax Department ,, before the Income Tax [Appellate ][Tribunals, ][High ][Courts ][and]Court [as a ][measure for ][reducing ][litigation. ][In ][paragraph]Supreme 2 of tlre said circular [we ]find [that ][the monetary ][limit ][fixed ][for ][filing]an appeal before [the ][High ][Court is ][Rs. ][1-OO ][crore.] 5. Therefore, the appeal [Iiled ][by the ][Department ][is]dismissed in terms of the [a-foresaid ][Circular ][No.17 ][of 2019, ][dated]OB.OB.2O 19. However, if [the ][appeal ][comes ][within ][the ][exception]under paragraph [10 ][of ][Circular ][No.3 ][of 2018, ][it ][would be ][open ][to]the Income Tax [Department ][to ][seek ][revival ][of ][the ][appeal' ][No]costs. 6. Miscellaneous applications [pending, ][if ][any, ][in ][this]appeal shall stand [closed.] I "'33-?'lEtidf.'Xla1DSECTION [ ] /ffRUE [ ] \/ffRUE [ ]SECTION [ ]To,lifli'ffi [r*Hril*ifiti'l'$ffi*'';Jtr'ffi ][Jf ][ff;]""]5 One [to ] [RATNAKAR' ][Advocate ][iOPUCI]6.rlwo [CD CoPies]ct/ .t aZ HIGH COURTHCJ & CVBRJDATED:1411212022 JUDGMENTITTA.No.239 of 2006 DISMISSING THE ITTAWITHOUT COSTSB I'.\'?,'\\sC_loat-'!..aF)