ITAT Directs AO to Delete Surcharge and Cess Wrongly Levied on Income Below ₹50 Lakh [Read Order]
The Tribunal noted that no surcharge or cess was applicable on the declared income and also pointed out that the appeal before the CIT(A) had been dismissed without granting an opportunity of being heard
![ITAT Directs AO to Delete Surcharge and Cess Wrongly Levied on Income Below ₹50 Lakh [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/08/04/2072982-itat-itat-directs-ao-to-delete-surcharge-and-cess-taxscan.webp "ITAT Directs AO to Delete Surcharge and Cess Wrongly Levied on Income Below ₹50 Lakh [Read Order]")
The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) directed the Assessing Officer (A0) to delete surcharge of ₹1,11,269 and cess of ₹4,451 that had been wrongly levied despite the assessee’s income being below ₹50 lakh. N K Infra JV, appellant-assessee, challenged the against the order dated 30.03.2025 for assessment year (AY) 2023-24 passed by Commissioner...
The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) directed the Assessing Officer (A0) to delete surcharge of ₹1,11,269 and cess of ₹4,451 that had been wrongly levied despite the assessee’s income being below ₹50 lakh.
N K Infra JV, appellant-assessee, challenged the against the order dated 30.03.2025 for assessment year (AY) 2023-24 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[CIT(A)].The assessee counsel stated that the assessee, a partnership firm, had filed its return of income declaring ₹10,02,420 and claimed a refund of ₹3,02,290.
The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) processed the return on 18.12.2023 and levied a surcharge of 37% amounting to ₹1,11,269 along with cess of ₹4,451. It was pointed out that since the returned and assessed income was below ₹50 lakh, no surcharge was applicable.
The assessee challenged this by filing an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the appeal was dismissed on the ground that the intimation had been rectified and a fresh order was issued on 30.01.2024.
Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here
The assessee counsel argued that the CIT(A) issued the order without serving a notice under section 250 and that even after the rectification, the surcharge remained. It was further submitted that the levy of a higher surcharge was unjust, without legal authority, and ought to have been removed.
The Senior Departmental Representative (Sr. DR), however, defended the decisions of the lower authorities.
A single member bench comprising Pawan Singh (Judicial Member) reviewed the submissions made by both parties and examined the orders of the lower authorities. It agreed with the assessee counsel’s argument that the surcharge and additional cess were not applicable since both the returned and assessed income were below ₹50 lakh.
It also observed that the appeal had been dismissed without giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. As a result, the tribunal allowed the appeal and instructed the jurisdictional assessing officer to delete the surcharge and cess imposed.
In conclusion, the grounds of appeal were allowed.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
