Rc/172/2000 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Ap Hyd v. M/S Avanthi Leathers Ltd Hyd

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDYAND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAMR.C. No.172 of 2000 ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) This reference is made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Hyderabad “B” Bench (for short “the Tribunal”), through its order dated28.03.2000 in R.A.No.785/Hyd/1996, at the instance of Commissioner ofIncome Tax, A.P.-II, Hyderabad, with the following questions of law: a)“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the order of the ITAT is correct in law in deleting theadditional tax of Rs.53,510/- charged under Section143(1A) of the I.T.Act?”. b)“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the ITAT was correct in law in holding that therewas no mistake apparent from record as on the date ofpassing the order u/s.154 on 25.1.1993 as theamendment to Section 143(1A) was not on statute bookas on that date, though the amendment was givenretrospective effect w.e.f.1.4.1999?”. 2)The facts in brief are that the respondent-industry filed return on29.12.1989 showing a loss of Rs.81,34,530/-. The Income Tax Officerprocessed the return under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax (for short “theAct”) and accepted the claim of the respondent. Thereafter, he reopened thematter alleging that a sum of Rs.5,09,614/- was not taken into account. Afterissuing a notice to the respondent, the Assessing Authority passed an orderdated 25.01.1993 reducing the loss to Rs.76,24,926/-. Aggrieved by thesame, the respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Appealsand on dismissal thereof, it carried the matter to the Tribunal. The Tribunalallowed the appeal. The Revenue filed an application under Section 256(2)of the Act, before the Tribunal with a request to refer certain questions framedby this Court for answer. On declining of the reference the revenue filedI.T.C.No.33 of 1999 and the same was allowed on 18.01.2000 andincompliance of the directions, the present reference is made. 3) Heard Sri S.R. Ashok, learned senior counsel for the Revenue and thelearned counsel for the respondent. 4) Even from a perusal of Question No.1, it is evident that the tax impact inthe instant case will be Rs.53,510/-. It is brought to our notice that at therelevant point of time, the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxesand Section 268A of the Act were to the effect that in case the tax impact isless than Rs.1,50,000/-, it is unnecessary for the Department to pursue theremedies of appeal or to seek reference. This Court took note of variouscirculars as well as the relevant provisions of law on this aspect, in itscommon judgment dated 24.01.2014 in W.T.A. No.24 of 2004 and Batch. Itwas also observed that wherever the tax impact is less than the stipulatedamount the Court can decline to answer the reference. 5) Following the same, we decline to answer the reference. ___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J Date:24.06.2014Gk. ____________________________CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDYAND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM Gk R.C. No.172 of 2000 Date:24.06.2014.