TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (8) TMI 94
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the ground that the disputed tax exceeds the monetary limit prescribed in the Central Board of Direct Taxes circular dated 27.3.2000? (ii) Whether the right of appeal conferred under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act could be restricted or whittled down by the Central Board of Direct Taxes ? (iii) While the Tribunal took into consideration of the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes whether it is empowered to neglect exemptions contained in the same and the subsequent clarifying circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes? (iv) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the circular of Central Board of Direct Taxes restricts the right of appeal conferred under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, even i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee stated as under:- (i) The building owned by the assessee has constructed on leasehold land. Hence, the value of the building or superstructure alone is included. (ii) Since the building is a business asset. WDV of the building has been admitted as per Rule 14 of Schedule III to Wealth Tax Act. (iii) Investment representing shares in companies and current assets are not assets within the meaning of Section 2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act. 4. In response to notice under Section 16(2) served, the assessee's representative appeared and after hearing the case, the net wealth of the assessee has been computed at Rs.17,19,535/-. 5. In respect of Income Tax assessment for the Assessment Year 1992-93, the assessee has filed the ret....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it was argued that the main object of the company is to take land on lease and construct building and let it out as commercial complex and accordingly, the income should be assessed under the head "business income" In support of the claim, the assessee quoted the case laws in the case of Bhoopalam Commercial Complex and Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CIT [2000] 72 ITD 262 (Bag.) and Sanmar Holdings Ltd Vs. ITO decided by the Madras Bench of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. After considering the objection of assessee and by relying on the decision of this Court reported in CIT v. Indian Metal and Metallurgical Corporation [1995] 215 ITR 424, the income has been taken as income from house property. Aggrieved over the same, the assessee preferred an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under which the circular was issued, this Court held that "10.We are of the considered view that none of the exceptions stated in the circular are applicable to the facts of the present case. The circular was stated to be issued by invoking the statutory power under Section 119 of the Income-tax Act. The appeal is filed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act. It is well settled principle of law that each and every provision of a statute has to be given the same importance. One provision cannot be alleviated to a higher pedestal than the other provision, of course, unless or otherwise specifically stated either in the scheme, the Act or in the provision itself that a particular provision is ....