THE DY. CIT., ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND vs. M/S. EMTICI ENGINEERING LTD., ANAND

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2774/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 October 2019AY 2014-153 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 on the disputed issues did not exceed the revised monetary limit specified in the CBDT circular. The Revenue's counsel fairly admitted the applicability of the circular.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made towards depreciation and disallowances under Section 14A and Section 40(a)(i). The assessee argued that the appeal was hit by a new 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 for appeals specified by the CBDT, and the tax effect of the disputed issues.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 40(a)(i),Section 9(1)(vii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri L. P. Jain, Sr.D.R, Shri Mehul K. Patel, A.R

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Vadodara (CIT(A)’ in short), dated 24.08.2017 arising in the assessment order dated 09.12.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2014-15.

[DCIT vs. M/s. Emtici Engineering Ltd.Thakor] A.Y. 2014-15 - 2 -

2.

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

“1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition towards excessive claim of depreciation. 2.1 Thai in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act merely on the erroneous presumption of overall sufficient interest free funds, without considering that this was only a presumption and the disallowance deserved to be upheld, as in the case of Avon Cycles Ltd. (2015) 53 taxmann.com 297 (P&H), particularly as the assessee had failed to controvert the findings of the Assessing Officer, and failed to demonstrate that investments were actually made out of interest free funds. 2.2 That in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act merely on the erroneous presumption of overall sufficient interest free funds, without examining the facts and whether the investments were actually made out of interest free funds. 3.1 That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) without considering that these payments were taxable in India as fees for technical services in terms of section 9(1)(vii) and were liable for TDS. 3.2 That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) without considering that the assessee had failed to furnish complete details and demonstrate that this income was not taxable in India under the Income Tax Act and the relevant Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).”

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. [DCIT vs. M/s. Emtici Engineering Ltd.Thakor] A.Y. 2014-15 - 3 -

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 in Open Court on 04/10/2019

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 04/10/2019 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 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →