Itta/57/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sree Maruthi Constructions
High Court
20 Feb 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/57/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sree Maruthi Constructions
Date of order
20 Feb 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/57/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sree Maruthi Constructions, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Hence, this appeal is dismissed on that ground. __________________ K.J.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTISENGUPTA AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
I.T.T.A. No. 57 of 2014
DATED:20.2.2014
Between:Commissioner of Income Tax,Vijayawada.
… Appellant
And
Sree Maruthi Constructions,Khammam District.
….Respondent
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTISENGUPTA ANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
I.T.T.A. No. 57 of 2014
Judgment:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan JyotiSengupta)
In this appeal, after hearing Mr.J.V. Prasad, learnedcounsel for the appellant and after going through the impugnedjudgment and order of the learned Tribunal, we were inclined toadmit the appeal in relation to interest and remuneration amounts.However, when we are informed that the tax effect of those twocounts are less than Rs. 10.00 lakhs, going by the departmentalinstructions dated 9.2.2011, we do not want to admit the appeal, asit does not fall within the exceptional cases in paragraph-8 of theabove instructions.
Hence, this appeal is dismissed on that ground.
__________________
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
_________________
SANJAY KUMAR, J
20.2.2014
PNB
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.
EaseValue