ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. KINNARI PRAVINCHANDRA SHAH, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2298/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 October 2020AY 2015-163 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was hit by the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which revised the monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the deletion of exemptions claimed under sections 54 and 54EC by the CIT(A). The tax effect in the appeal was below the revised monetary limits set by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the revised monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT circulars for tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54,Section 54EC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr.D.R

आदेश/O R D E R

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:

1.

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 11.09.2018 arising in the assessment order dated 22.12.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY. 2015-16.

2.

The substantive ground of appeal raised by the Revenue reads as under:-

"(1) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.51,90,000/- made on account of disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 54. (2) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- made on account of disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 54EC. (3) On the facts and circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the AO. (4) It is therefore prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the order of the Assessing Officer be restored to the above extent. (5) This appeal is filed as tax effect in the case is Rs.26,04,756/- which is above the monetary limits specified in the Board’s Circular no 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018.”

3.

At the time of hearing, it is transpired that the appeal filed by the Revenue is hit by recently issued CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08/08/2019 revising the previous thresholds pertaining to tax effects. It is inter alia noticed that the CBDT vide Instruction No. F. No. 279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dt. 20/08/2019 has observed that Circular No.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 relating to enhancement of monetary limits is also applicable to all pending appeals. As per aforesaid Circular read with instruction, all pending appeals filed by Revenue are liable to be dismissed as a measure for reducing litigation where the tax effect does not exceed the prescribed monetary limit which is now revised at Rs.50 Lakhs. In the instant case, the tax effect on the disputed issues raised by the Revenue is stated to be not exceeding Rs.50 lakhs and therefore appeal of the Revenue is required to be dismissed in limine.

4.

The Learned DR for the Revenue fairly admitted the applicability of the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. However, it will be open to the Revenue to seek restoration of its appeal on showing inapplicability of the aforesaid CBDT Circular in any manner.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

This Order pronounced on 05/10/2020

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 05/10/2020 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →