If the tax effect is less than minimum than it can be avoidable


Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
In appeal for the assessment year 2001-02, the Revenue assails deletion of additions of Rs.3,60,000/- and Rs.1,56,388/- made by the ld. CIT(A). During the course of hearing, it was admitted by the ld. DR that the tax effect in this case was less than Rs.3 lakhs

Citation :
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle VI(2),Aayakar Bhavan, New Block,Chennai 600 034. Appellant)Vs.M/s. Shree Shakthi Ware House (P)Ltd [PAN:AACCS9723M](Respondent

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

CHENNAI ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI.

Before Shri Hari Om Maratha, Judicial Member and

Shri Abraham P. George, Accountant Member

I.T.A. Nos. 503 and 504/Mds/2011

Assessment Year: 2001-02 and 2002-03

The Assistant Commissioner of

Income Tax,

Company Circle VI(2),

Aayakar Bhavan, New Block,

Chennai 600 034.

(Appellant)

Vs.

M/s. Shree Shakthi Ware House (P)

Ltd., 2-C, Riaz Garden, 29,

Kodambakkam High Road,

Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.

[PAN:AACCS9723M]

(Respondent)

Revenue by : Shri R.B. Naik, CIT – DR

Assessee by : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate

Date of Hearing : 12.12.2011

Date of pronouncement 12.12.2011

ORDER

PER BENCH

These are the appeals filed by the Revenue against the separate orders dated 03.01.2011 for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 of ld. CIT(A) V, Chennai.

2. In appeal for the assessment year 2001-02, the Revenue assails deletion of additions of Rs.3,60,000/- and Rs.1,56,388/- made by the ld. CIT(A). During the course of hearing, it was admitted by the ld. DR that the tax effect in this case was less than Rs.3 lakhs.

3. Similarly, for the assessment year 2002-03, the Revenue has assailed the deletion of Rs.5,11,494/-. The tax effect here is also less than Rs.3 lakhs and even below Rs.2 lakhs.

4. In so far as the assessment year 2001-02, the total assessed income was only Rs.2,36,765/- and total tax thereon was Rs.93,641/- only.

5. On both the years, we are of the opinion that Circular No.3/2011 of CBDT will apply and due to low tax effect, the appeals of the Revenue are not maintainable. There is no case for the Revenue that the issue involved has got any cascading effect over other years or on the assessments of any group of which assessee is a part.

6. In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 12.12.2011.

               Sd/-                                                                                               Sd/-

(HARI OM MARATHA)                                                   (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE)

  JUDICIAL MEMBER                                                      ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Chennai, Dated, the 12.12.2011

Vm/-

To: The assessee//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.

 

Ayush
Published in Income Tax
Views : 835

Comments




CCI Pro



Company
28 August 2026
Assistant Manager

NRS AND ASSOCIATES

Kozhikode

CA Inter

View Details
Company
11 August 2026
COMPLIANCE EXECUTIVE

YMW COMPLIANCE SERVICES LLP

Others

CA Final

View Details
Company
21 August 2026
Finance Manager

Resollect Technologies Pvt Ltd

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 17 August 2026
CA Article Trainee

ASC Group

Noida

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 14 August 2026
Article Assistant

N J Suresh & Associates

Bengaluru

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 01 September 2026
Articles

Saini Pati Shah & Co LLP, Chartered Accountants

Mumbai

CA Foundation

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 17 August 2026
Article Assistant

K R Kiran Kumar & Associates

Bengaluru

CA Inter

View Details
Company
Featured 19 August 2026
Chartered Accountant

apricus india

Pune

CA

View Details