THE DY. CIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VRINDAVAN FURNISHING PVT. LTD., KHEDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 398/AHD/2014Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 September 2019AY 2010-113 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 not maintainable due to the applicability of the CBDT circular. The circular mandates dismissal of appeals where the tax effect does not exceed the revised monetary limit.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing a deduction and deleting an addition. The assessee argued that the appeal was hit by a CBDT circular revising monetary limits for appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable in light of the revised monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37,Section 68,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr.D.R, Smt. Ira Kapoor, A.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)-XIV, Ahmedabad (CIT(A)’ in short), dated 12.11.2013 arising in the assessment order dated 05.02.2013 passed by the [DCIT(OSD) vs. M/s. Vrindavan Furnishing Pvt. Ltd.] A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 - Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2010-11.

2.

The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read as under:-

“1). The Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-XIV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in allowing the deduction amounting to Rs.1,35,156/- made u/s.37 of the Act when the same was not claimed in the Return of Income. 2). The Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-XIV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.90,00,000/- made on account of undisclosed income u/s.68 of the Act since Assessee failed to discharge its onus to prove the cash credit to be genuine.”

3.

At the time of hearing, it was submitted by the Ld.AR for the assessee 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 [DCIT(OSD) vs. M/s. Vrindavan Furnishing Pvt. Ltd.] A.Y. 2010-11 - 3 - showing inapplicability of the aforesaid CBDT Circular in any manner.

5.

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

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 03/09/2019

Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 03/09/2019 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 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →