THE DY. CIT., CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INFINIUM MOTORS PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1334/AHD/2016Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 October 2019AY 2011-122 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 dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not maintainable. This was due to a CBDT circular enhancing the monetary limit for appeals, making this appeal fall below the threshold.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting disallowances made under Section 36(1)(iii) and Section 14A of the Income Tax Act. The appeal was filed for the assessment year 2011-12.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(iii),Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD BENCH ‘B’, AHMEDABAD

PER JUSTICE P P BHATT, PRESIDENT :

1.

By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 18th February, 2016, passed by the learned CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad for the assessment year 2011-12.

2.

Grievances raised by the Assessing Officer are as follows:

“(1) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs.65,20,964/- u/s 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record.

(2) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs.14.34 lacs u/s 14A of the IT Act without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record.

(3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer.

(4) It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored to the above extent.”

DCIT Vs. Infinium Motors Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year : 2011-12 Page 2 of 2

3.

At the time of hearing before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee; however, since the issue in question is covered by CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, this appeal is decided ex-parte qua the assessee, after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record.

4.

Having heard the learned Departmental Representative and having perused the material on record, we find that prima facie this appeal of the Revenue is no longer maintainable in view of the recent CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. The mandatory limit for cases in which Revenue can challenge the relief granted by the CIT(A) now stands enhanced to Rs.50 lakhs. This concession granted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is retrospective in effect inasmuch as it applies to all pending appeals as well. In view of the above position, the appeal of the Revenue is no longer maintainable and must be dismissed as such.

5.

It is, however, made clear that on re-verification at the end of the Assessing Officer it comes out that the tax effect of more than Rs.50 lakhs is being involved in the appeal or the appeal falls within the exemption clause of the Circular, then the Revenue will be at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application to recall the Tribunal order. The application should be filed within time limit prescribed in the Act.

6.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect. Pronounced in the open court today on the 7th October, 2019.

More judgments on Section 36(1)(iii)

All 3,665 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →