Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI
Income Tax Officer Micro Stock Holding Pvt. Ltd. Ward-17(2) 98, Shahzada Bagh Industrial New Delhi Vs. Area, Rohtak Road Delhi-110 035 PAN-AAGCM 3051Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Ms. Rinku Singh, Commissioner of Income Tax- Departmental Representative (CIT-DR, for short) Respondent by None ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM: (A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 15.11.2019 for Assessment Year 2015-16. Grounds taken in this appeal of Revenue are as under:
“1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justifying by restricting addition on account of increase in interest (during the year Rs.1,00,01,911/-) to Rs.94,80,000/- ignoring the fact that there is no business during the year of the assessee company ?”
Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justifying by allowing the interest u/s 36 (1)(iii) of the Act, whereas capital borrowed by the assessee company was not used for the purpose of business of profession ? 3. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
(B) At the outset, it was brought to our notice at the time of hearing, by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“Ld. CIT-DR” for short) that tax effect in this appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. She further submitted, that vide recent CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with earlier CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, minimum threshold limit of tax effect for filing of appeals by Revenue in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT", for short) has been enhanced to Rs.50,00,000/-; and that in a subsequent clarification issued by CBDT vide F. No. 279/Misc/M-93/2018-lTJ, dated 20/08/2019, it has been clarified by CBDT that the aforesaid revised monetary limit is also applicable to all pending appeals in ITAT. In view of the foregoing, it was submitted by Ld. CIT-DR for Revenue that this appeal is not maintainable. She did not press the appeal. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed being not pressed; and ITO vs. Micro Stock Holding Pvt. Ltd. also being not maintainable having regard to aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 in the light of aforesaid clarification dated 20.08.2019.
(C) Before leaving, we clarify that Revenue will be at liberty to approach Income Tax Appellate Tribunal U/s 254(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961; seeking recall of this order and, for restoration of this appeal if it is found that appeal of Revenue is not covered by aforesaid CBDT Circulars dated 08.08.2019 and 11.07.2018.
(D) In the result, this appeal by Revenue is dismissed.
This order was already pronounced orally on 18th July, 2022 in Open Court, in the presence of Ld. CIT-DR for Revenue. Now, this written order in writing is signed today on 19/07/2022.