Itta/251/2003 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. M/S.incon Engineering (P) Ltd

IN"THE HIGH COURT FOR AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE [C.V. ][BHASK/\R ] INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL [NO: ][2][5'l ][o] [2003] Appeal Under Section 260 [A of the lncome ][Tax ][Act, 1961 ][aggrieved ][by]the order in l.T.A. No. [1286 ]/ [/ ][1995 ][dated ][11-03-2003 0n the ][file ][of ][the]Court of the lncome [Tax ][Appellate Tribunal ], [Hyderabad ][Bench'B', ][Hyderabad]preferred against the order of the commissioner [of ][lncome Tax ][( ][Appeals ][) ]-lllHyderabad in Appeal [No. ][231 ][& ][246 ][tac4 ][(5)/ CIT ][(A) ]- [lll'94'95 ][dated 11'01']1g9g preferred against the [order ][of ][the ][Asst. commissioner of ][lncome ][Tax,]Company Circte - 4 [(5) ], [Hyderabad ][dated ][23-03'1994 ][in ] [/ ] [No' ] [-4]/AC 4 (5) Between: The Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax-ll, ][Hyderabad]...APPELLANTAND lV/s.lncon Engineering [(P) ][Ltd, ][Hyderabad ]' ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant [SRl. B. ] [representing ][for]Ms. K. MAMATA CHOWDARY SC [FOR lT DEPARTMENT] Counsel for the Respondent: The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHIIYANANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDYI.T.T.A. No.251 ot 2003 JUDGMENT: eer the Hon'bte the Chiel Justice UJjat Bhugan) Heard Mr. B.Narsimha Sarma, learned counselrepresenting Ms. K.Mamata Chowdary, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for Income Tax Department appeaing forthe appellant and Mr. Challa Gunaranj an, learned counselfor the respondent. 2. This appeal under Section 26O.4 of the Income TaxAct, 196i, has been filed against the order dated 11.03.2003passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HyderabadBench A', Hyderabad (Tribunal) in I.T.A.No. 1286/Hydlt99Sfor the assessment year l99t-92. 3. In the appeal, the following substantial questions of lawhave been proposed: "A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding thatAccounting Staadard-7 prescribed by Institute ofChartered Accountants would be appropriate andapplicable even in relation to execution of turnkey projectsof engineering contracts of a shorter duration ? B) Whether the Appellate Tribuna.l is justified inrecording the frnding that the method of accounting systemmaintained by the assessee is not correct, notwithstandingthe assessee adopting inapplicable AS-7 to an engineeringcontract of a shorter duration ?C) Whether the findings of the Appellate Tribuna_l inthis behalf are based on materia,l on record ?D) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is .justified inholding that rejection of books of accounts is tmpermissiblemerely because the assessee had maintained accounts inaccordance with AS-7 consistently? 4. On 15.12.2003, the appeal was admitted. 5. In the hearing today, we have perused the assessmentorder dated 23.03.1994. We find therefrom that the taxabieincome of the respondent was determined at Rs.4, tZ,4lg.OOand quantum of tax to be paid was assessed atRs.2,72,249.OO. 6. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issuedCircular No. 17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, amending theprevious Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 71.OZ.2OlB, by furtherenhancing the monetary limits for filing appeals by theIncome Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate. Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court as a measure for \ for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said circular wefind that the monetary limit fixed for filing an appeal beforethe High Court is Rs. 1.00 crore.the High Court is Rs. 1.00 crore. 7. In the instant appeai, tax effect is ofRs.2,72,249 l-, which is well below the monetan' limit 6. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issuedCircular No. 17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, amending theprevious Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 71.OZ.2OlB, by furtherenhancing the monetary limits for filing appeals by theIncome Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate. Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court as a measure for \ for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said circular wefind that the monetary limit fixed for filing an appeal beforethe High Court is Rs. 1.00 crore.the High Court is Rs. 1.00 crore. 7. In the instant appeai, tax effect is ofRs.2,72,249 l-, which is well below the monetan' limit 8. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Department1Sdismissed in terms of the aforesaid Circular No. 17 of 2019,dated 08.08.20i9. However, if the appeal comes u,ithin theexception under paragraph 10 of Circular No.3 of 2018. itwould be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revivalof the appeal. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand ciosed. However, there sha1l be no order as to costs. -..-SD/.K.SRtNIVASAoJOINT REGISTR,TRUE COPY//SECTION O FICER-..-SD/.K.SRtNIVASAoJOINT REGISTR,TRUE COPY//SECTION O FICER Toi.-Th" ln.or" [Tax ][Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ] [Hyderabad'] Z. fne Commissioner'of [lncome ][Tax ][, ][Appeals ]- [lll, ][Hyderabad' ]. .. g. fhe nsst. Commissioner of lncometax , Company Circle - [-4 ][(-5), ][Hyderabad]. ..+. One C-C io Ms. [K. ] [CHOUDARY, ][Advocale^[OP^U.Cl]5. o;; CC io Snl. CHALLA [GUNARANJAN Advocate ][ ]6. Two CD CoPies7. One Spare [CoPY]+. One C-C io Ms. [K. ] [CHOUDARY, ][Advocale^[OP^U.Cl]5. o;; CC io Snl. CHALLA [GUNARANJAN Advocate ][ ]6. Two CD CoPies7. One Spare [CoPY] &--- HIGH GOURT DATED:1410912022 JUDGMENTITTA.No.251 of 2003 DISMISSING ,..)/.-aA(t>tn^[rA]1A\[irFz] .\\;-_::TAr€ oo('o28 [fliJ ][2$[]