THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. B. ZAVERI JEWELS PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 649/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 September 2019AY 2010-112 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 noted that the tax effect of the disputed additions did not exceed Rs. 50 lakhs and was therefore covered by CBDT Instruction No. 17 of 2019. The appeal was dismissed based on this instruction.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made on account of disallowance of expenses and unexplained cash credit. The total disputed addition was Rs.1,19,60,494/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT instructions. The validity of additions made on account of disallowance of expenses and unexplained cash credit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD - BENCH ‘D’

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Hearing: 30/08/2019Pronounced: 23/09/2019

PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld.CIT(A), Gandhinagar dated 20.12.2016 passed for the assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1.

“(a) That the ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.19,60,494/- made on account of disallowance of expenses being 25% of the total expenses.

(b) That the ld.CIT(A) erred in taw and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,00,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act an account of unexplained cash credit in the case of M/sA.A. Jewels.”

3.

The After going through the grounds, we noticed that total addition disputed before the Tribunal is Rs.1,19,60,494/- (Rs.19,60,494/- plus Rs.1,00,00,000/-). Therefore, total tax involved would not be more than Rs.50 lakhs. Therefore, we enquired with the ld.DR whether tax effect on the aggregate of disputed sum exceeds Rs.50 lakhs or not, and whether CBDT Instruction no.17 of 2019 dated 8.8.2019 applicable to the present case or not, to which, the ld.DR did not dispute the same, but left to the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law.

4.

On due consideration of the record and on perusal of CBDT Instruction NO.17 of 2091 dated .8.2019 we are of the view that the present appeal of the Revenue falls within the purview of the CBDT Instruction cited (supra). It is not disputed by the Revenue that tax effect on the disputed addition is more than Rs.50 lakhs, and therefore, keeping in view the above CBDT circular and provisions of section 268A of the Income Tax Act, we are of the view that the present appeal of the Revenue deserves to be dismissed. It is dismissed.

However, it is observed that in case on verification at the end of the AO it can be demonstrated that the tax effect is more, or Revenue's case falls within the ambit of exceptions provided in the Circular, then the Department will be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recall of this order. Such application should be filed within the time period prescribed in the Act. In view of the above, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect.

5.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect. Order pronounced in the Court on 23rd September, 2019 at Ahmedabad.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →