What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, and the case did not fall under any exemption. The assessee's cross-objection was also dismissed as it was not pressed.

The Revenue appealed the deletion of a disallowance of market-to-market foreign exchange loss. The assessee argued the appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable based on the tax effect threshold stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018.

DCIT vs Awn Agro Pvt. Ltd., 2014-15 | ITAT Ahmedabad 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD ‘A1’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Pronounced: 29.01.2019

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.2108/Ahd/2017

C.O. No.53/Ahd/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Bench:

ITA No.2108/Ahd/2017& C.O. No.53/Ahd/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 2 of 3 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 24.07.2017, passed by the learned CIT(A)-1, Ahmedabad, in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2014-15, on the following grounds :-

“That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs.60,44,418/- made on the ground that market-to-market foreign exchange loss is notional loss and cannot b allowed as per instruction 3 of 2010 of CBDT.

On the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer to the extent mentioned above since the assessee has failed to disclose his true income/book profit.

The appellant prays that the order of CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be resorted to the above extent.”

At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the present appeal of the Revenue need to be dismissed on account of low tax effect in view of the recent CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018. The learned Departmental Representative fairly admitted that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than the limit prescribed by the aforesaid CBDT Circular.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that prima-facie the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable in view of the CBDT Circular No.3/2018 in F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt) dated 11th July, 2018, vide which it has been decided by the Board that no departmental appeals should be filed before the Tribunal if the tax effect by virtue of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)’s order is below Rs. 20 Lacs. The Board has provided exemptions at clause (10) of the Instructions wherein it has been provided that these instructions will not be applicable, where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act/Rule is under challenge or where Board’s order, notification, instruction or circular has been held to be illegal or where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department or where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets/bank accounts etc. We find that the present case does not fall within the exemption clause and the tax effect is less than Rs.20 Lacs. Therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable and hence dismissed.

Learned Departmental Representative states the liberty may kindly be given to point out, upon necessary further verifications, and to seek recall the dismissal of appeals and restoration of the appeals in the cases (i) in which it can be demonstrated that the appeals are covered by the exceptions (ii) which are inadvertently included in this bunch of appeals, wherein the tax effect, in terms of the CBDT circular (supra), exceeds Rs 20,00,000. None opposes this prayer; we accept the same. We make it clear that the appellants shall be at liberty to point out the cases which are wrongly included in the appeals so summarily dismissed, either owing to wrong computation of tax effect or owning to such cases being covered by the permissible exceptions- or for any other reason, and we will take appropriate remedial steps in this regard.

ITA No.2108/Ahd/2017& C.O. No.53/Ahd/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 3 of 3 5. Coming to the Cross Objection filed by the assessee, when this Cross Objection was called out for hearing, learned counsel for the assessee Ms. Era Kapoor submitted that she does not wish to press the Cross Objection due to smallness of the amount involved. She, however, prayed that liberty may be given to take up the issue in subsequent years, if so advised.

In view of the above, Cross Objection filed by the assessee is treated as dismissed.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee, both are dismissed. Pronounced in the open Court today on the 29th day of January, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- Justice P P Bhatt Pramod Kumar (President) (Vice President) Ahmedabad, dated the 29th day of January, 2019

PBN/*

Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) Guard File

By order

Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad

DCIT, CIR.1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. AWN AGRO PVT. LTD., 2014-15

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments