ACIT, CIRCLE- 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UEM INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5426/DEL/2017Status: HeardITAT Delhi01 February 2022AY 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 appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to low tax effect, as it was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. The appeal was dismissed on this ground.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2011-12, challenging deletions made regarding disallowance of interest without TDS, club expenses, and additions on account of sundry creditors. The Revenue's grounds of appeal pertained to issues where the tax effect was less than the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the low tax effect, and whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowances and additions made by the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI & SH. AMIT SHUKLA

For Appellant: Shri Manish Malik, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 01.02.2022Pronounced: 01.02.2022

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 23.04.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2011-12.

2. Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting disallowance of Rs.75,29,279/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non deduction of TDS while making payment of interest without considering a fact that the assessee had failed to produce

any credible evidence in this regard even after providing sufficient opportunities during assessment proceedings?”

2.

“Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in reducing the club expenses from Rs.15,748/- to Rs.13,266/- by accepting the documents filed by the assessee during appellate proceedings even when the assessee had not fulfilled conditions as laid down under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and no opportunity was given to the AO of being heard?”

3. “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.33,21,852/- made by the Assessing Officer(AO) u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act(the Act) on account of sundry creditors?

4. “That the appellant craves leave to add, alter amend or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

3.

At the time of hearing, we inquired from the Ld. DR as to whether the tax effect of the grounds raised by Revenue is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT for filing the appeal to which he fairly admitted that the tax effect is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT for filing the appeal in both the appeal.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On perusing the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue, we find that Revenue is aggrieved by the order of Learned CIT(A) in respect of the relief given by him. We find that CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 had increased the limit for filing appeal before ITAT at Rs. 20 lakhs. The limit for filing the appeal before ITAT and other authorities were enhanced by CBDT vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. As per the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019, no Department appeal is to be filed against relief given by the Learned CIT(A) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal unless the tax effect, excluding interest, exceeds Rs.50 lakhs. We find that in the present case, the tax effect involved is less than Rs.50 lakhs. In the absence of any material placed on record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the issue in the present appeal is covered by exceptions provided in para 10 of the aforesaid CBDT Circular of 11.07.2018, we are of the view that the monetary limit prescribed by the instructions of the CDBT Circular dated 08.08.2019 would be applicable to the present appeal of the Department. We therefore hold the present appeal of Revenue to be not maintainable on account of low tax effect. However, in case there is any error in the computation of the tax effect involved or if for any reason, the aforesaid CBDT Circular is not applicable, it would be open to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal. Thus the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

5.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 01.02.2022, immediately after conclusion of the hearing of the matter in virtual mode.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →