Itta/78/2002 Of The Commi.of Income Tax Hyd v. Ch.eswar Reddy

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH& HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAMI.T.T.A. No. 78 of 2002 DATE: 21.04.2014 Between: Commissioner of Income-Tax .. Appellant And Challa Eswar Reddy .. Respondent JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Challa KodandaRam) This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the ordersdated 19.11.2001 in I.T.A.No. 699/Hyd/1996 passed bythe Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Hyderabadin relation to the assessment year 1992-93. The followingthree questions of law are said to be arising from theorders of the Tribunal for adjudication: a)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding thatthe compensation received by the assessee is notassessable to Capital Gain Tax, merely because thequantum of compensation fixed by the competent authority isdisputed?the compensation received by the assessee is notassessable to Capital Gain Tax, merely because thequantum of compensation fixed by the competent authority isdisputed? b)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding thatthe principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Courtreported in 161 ITR 524 is applicable to the facts of thecase?the principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Courtreported in 161 ITR 524 is applicable to the facts of thecase? c)Whether the principle laid down in 161 ITR 524 asunderstood by the Appellate Tribunal can be said to be goodlaw even after insertion of Section 45(5) by Finance Act,1987?understood by the Appellate Tribunal can be said to be goodlaw even after insertion of Section 45(5) by Finance Act,1987? Though notice was served on the respondent-assessee, no representation is made on his behalf. Sri S.R.Ashok, learned Standing Counsel for theIncome-Tax Department has urged this Court to considerthe matter on merits ex parte. Having heard the learned senior Standing Counseland perused the material placed on record, we areinclined to dismiss the appeal by following the CommonJudgment dated 24.01.2014 delivered by this Court inW.T.A.Nos.24 of 2004 and batch on account of the factthat the amount of tax involved in the present appeal isbelow the amounts prescribed for filing the appeals underSection 260-A of the Income-tax Act. The controversy in issue involves tax liability ofRs.1,16,290/- which is far below the amount prescribed inthe Instruction No.1979, dated 27.03.2000 issued by theCentral Board of Direct Taxes (C.B.D.T.), a statutory bodyconstituted under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act,1961. Following the Common Judgment dated 24.01.2014in W.T.A.Nos.24 of 2004 and batch, the present appeal isdismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel to the dismissal of the appeal,Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall standdisposed of as infructuous. _________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J 21.04.2014 ______________________ CHALLA KODANDA bcj RAM,J