THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. I.C. PANDEY AGRO PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 696/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 May 2019AY 2012-132 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 of the Revenue deserved to be dismissed based on the CBDT instruction regarding low tax effect, as the tax effect was below the prescribed limit. The Revenue did not dispute the applicability of the circular.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 55.60 lakhs made by the AO under Section 68. The assessee argued that the appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal was maintainable before the Tribunal due to a low tax effect, as per CBDT instructions.

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, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA

Hearing: 10/05/2019Pronounced: 10/05/2019

PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against order of ld.CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad dated 24.1.2017 passed for the Asstt.Year 2012-13.

2.

Only issue raised in the appeal of the Revenue is against the order of the ld.CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.55.60 lakhs made by the AO under section 68 of the Income Tax Act.

3.

The ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the appeal of the Revenue deserves to be dismissed on account of low tax effect involved in it. He submitted that the tax effect on the addition disputed by the Revenue of Rs.17,18,040/- which is below Rs.20 lakhs, and therefore, by virtue of the CBDT instruction bearing no.3 of 2018 dated 11.08.2018, the Revenue is

ITA No.696/Ahd/2017 2 prohibited from filing such appeal before the Tribunal therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable at the threshold. The tax effect on the impugned addition calculated by the assessee is as under: Returned income 55,60,000 Income assessed by the ld.AO Tax on income assessed by the ld.AO Income Tax @ 30% 16,68,000/- Surcharge (Nil being less than 1 Cr) NIL Education Cess @2% on Tax 33,360 Secondary and Higher Secondary Education 16,680 Cess @1% on Tax Total Tax 17,18,040

4.

The ld.DR has not disputed applicability of above circular cited by the ld.counsel for the assessee, and has not pointed out whether the case of the Revenue fall within the ambit of exceptions provided in the Circular or not. Thus, keeping in view the above CBDT circular, which is applicable to pending appeals also, and provisions of section 268A of the Income Tax Act, we are of the view that the appeal of the Revenue deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed.

However, it is observed that in case on re-verification at the end of the AO it comes to the notice 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.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect. Order pronounced in the Court on 10th May, 2019 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 10/05/2019

More judgments on Section 68

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →