DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. GOLDMOHUR DESIGNS & APPAREL LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6982/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 July 2026AY 2011-123 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 tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary threshold prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals before the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 38,37,418/-, which was made as unexplained investment. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the CBDT's monetary threshold for appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect is below the CBDT's prescribed monetary limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI PAWAN SINGH

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Rajgopal Parthasarathi – SR
Pronounced: 30/07/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER)

ITA No. 6982/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12

Deputy Commissioner of Goldmohur Designs & Apparel, Income Tax, Room No.126A, Limited, 145, Goldmohur Mill, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, Vs. Dada Saheb Phalke Road, Dadar Mumbai – 400020, East, Mumbai – 400014, Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN NO. AADCG 1613 M Appellant Respondent

Assessee by : Ms. Dinkle Hariya, Adv

Revenue by : Shri Rajgopal Parthasarathi – SR DR.

: 29/07/2026 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 30/07/2026

ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 29.08.2025, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], for Assessment Year (in short ‘A.Y’), 2011-12, raising following grounds:

Goldmohur Designs & Apparel, Limited 2 ITA No. 6982/MUM/2025

“i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal filed by the assessee and deleting the addition of Rs. 38,37,418/ to the total income as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the LT. Act." (ii) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal filed by the assessee ignoring the fact that the assessee had merely made purchases out of books of accounts and taken bills from M/s. Arkan Fashion to regularize the purchases from this party." (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in allowing the assessee's appeal ignoring the facts of the case and not anpreciating the fact that the assessee failed to produce the party with their books of account" (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition ignoring the facts of the case that the assessee fouled to prove source of incestment in such purchases"

2.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is below the monetary threshold prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) for filing appeals before the Tribunal under Circular No. 05/2024, and, therefore, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is not maintainable. The learned Departmental Representative was unable to dispute the aforesaid factual position.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of memorandum of appeal ( Form No. 36 ) filed by the Revenue reveals that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is ₹11,85,762/-, which is admittedly below the prescribed monetary limit of ₹60,00,000/- for filing appeals before the Tribunal. The present appeal, therefore, is hit by

Goldmohur Designs & Apparel, Limited 3 ITA No. 6982/MUM/2025

the aforesaid CBDT Circular and is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable.

6.

It is, however, clarified that if the Assessing Officer subsequently finds that the case falls within any of the exceptions carved out in the aforesaid CBDT Circular, it shall be open to the Revenue to move an appropriate Miscellaneous Application seeking recall of this order, in accordance with law.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 30/07/2026 M. Ranganath Vittal , Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file.

BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →