PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 vs. MULTIPLEX CAPITAL LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/781/2015HC DelhiDLHC01396236201526 April 2016Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in view of Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December 2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, which stipulates that appeals with a tax effect of less than Rs. 20 lakhs should be treated as not pressed, the present appeal had to be treated as such. The Court relied on the computation provided by the Assessee's counsel, which demonstrated that the tax effect, including surcharge and education cess, minus interest, was below the threshold of Rs. 20 lakhs. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not pressed. The ratio decidendi is that appeals falling below the monetary limit prescribed by the relevant CBDT circular are to be considered not pressed, irrespective of the initial claim of tax effect by the Revenue, if verified to be below the threshold.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6 (Revenue) against Multiplex Capital Ltd. (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself. The procedural history involves the Revenue stating the tax effect as Rs. 22,51,021 in its memorandum of appeal. However, the Assessee's counsel presented a computation showing the tax effect, including surcharge and education cess, minus interest, to be less than Rs. 20 lakhs. This discrepancy in the tax effect is the material fact leading to the present decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable in light of the tax effect being less than Rs. 20 lakhs, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015? (Question of law, turning on the interpretation and applicability of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015). Assessee's contention: The tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lakhs, and therefore, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, the appeal should be treated as not pressed by the Revenue. Revenue's contention: The Revenue initially stated the tax effect as Rs. 22,51,021 in its memorandum of appeal. However, no specific argument was recorded by the Revenue regarding the tax effect or the applicability of the circular during the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 5. +

ITA 781/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 ..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Senior

Standing counsel.

versus

MULTIPLEX CAPITAL LTD.

..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate.

CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R %

26.04.2016

1.

Learned counsel for the Assessee has pointed out that the tax effect involved is less than Rs.20 lakhs although in the memorandum of appeal the Revenue states that the tax effect is Rs. 22,51,021.

2.

The computation placed on record by learned counsel for the Assessee shows that the tax together with surcharge and education cess minus interest works out to less than Rs. 20 lakhs.

3.

Consequently, in view of Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December 2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, this appeal has to be treated as not pressed by the Revenue. ITA 781/2015

Page 1 of 2

4.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed as not pressed.

S. MURALIDHAR, J

VIBHU BAKHRU, J APRIL 26, 2016 dn

ITA 781/2015

Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →