What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the disputed additions were approximately Rs. 1.00 Crore, and the tax effect was indeed less than the Rs. 50 Lakhs limit set by CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular, making the appeal not maintainable.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal considering the tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit.

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income… vs Ari Circle, Navsari | ITAT Surat 2021

Assessee by ShriRasesh Shah, CA Revenue by Ms. Anupma Singla – Sr-DR Date of hearing 30.12.2021 Date of pronouncement 30.12.2021 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1. 1. This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-Valsad dated 31.08.2016 for assessment year (AY) 2011-12.

2. At the outset of hearing the Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee submits that in the present appeal tax effect is less than the monetary limit fixed by CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable. The Ld. AR for the assessee further invited our attention on column No. 7 of Form-36, wherein the disputed (A.Y. 11-12) Sh. Khemchandbhai K Tharwani additions are only Rs. 1.00 Crore (Aprox) and admittedly the tax effect would be less than Rs. 50 Lakhs.

3. The Ld. DR for the revenue after going through the grounds of appeal and the working of tax effect mentioned in column-3B of Form 36 submits that tax effect since to be less than Rs.50 lakh. Therefore the appeal should be dismissed as not maintainable. However, the Revenue may be given liberty to move appropriate application if it is discovered that tax if the involved in the present appeal more than the monetary limit of Rs.50 lakh.

4. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the ground of appeal and the order of Ld. CIT(A). On perusal of order of ld CIT(A) and the details provided in column-7 of Form-36, we find that the additions in dispute is Rs. 1.00 Crore (Approx), on account of suppressed expenditure in Building KK Plaza. Admittedly the tax effect involve in the present Revenue’s appeal is less than prescribed limit of Rs.50 lakh fixed by CBDT’s in its Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 for filing appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. However, the Revenue is given liberty to move appropriate application if at later stage it is discovered that the tax effect is more than Rs.50 lakh.

(A.Y. 11-12) Sh. Khemchandbhai K Tharwani

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments