Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2006 (9) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 154 of Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed appeals. There was a delay in the matter. An application was filed seeking to condone delay before the Commissioner. The Commissioner rejected the appeals on the ground of delay. Thereafter the second appeals were filed. The Registrar noticed that there is a deficit court fee payable on the appeals. According to the Registrar, the appellant-assessee has to pay court fee at the rate of Rs. 10,000 for each one of the appeals in the light of the quantum involved in terms of the order of the assessing authority. The appellant objected to the said payment. Hence the matter was listed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by a detailed order, has chosen to reject th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... considered in each one of the appeals. The appeals stood rejected only on the ground of delay. When those orders were challenged before the Tribunal, the Registrar has chosen to demand a sum of Rs. 10,000 in the light of the order of the assessing authority. The Tribunal has accepted the Registrar's objection in terms of the impugned order. 6. Section 253(6) of the Act would read as under : "(6) An appeal to the Appellate Tribunal shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner and shall, in the case of an appeal made, on or after the 1st day of October, 1998, irrespective of the date of initiation of the assessment proceedings relating thereto, be accompanied by a fee of,- (a) where the total income....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... thousand five hundred rupees. Section 253(6)(c) would provide that in the case of an appeal involving more than two hundred thousand rupees, the court fee payable is one per cent of the assessed income subject to a maximum of ten thousand rupees. Section 253(6)(d) would provide that in the event the subject matter of the appeal relates to any matter other than those specified in clauses (a), (b) and (c) the court fee payable is five hundred rupees. 8. In the case on hand, it is seen that the Appellate Commissioner has chosen to reject the appeal on the ground of limitation. In our view, such an order would fall within clause (d) of section 253(6) of the Act. Hence, only a sum of Rs. 500 is payable in terms of section 253(6)(d) of the Act.....