Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue preferred appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2017-18 to 2021-22. The tax effect involved in these appeals was below the threshold limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 09/2024.
Held
The Tribunal held that the tax effect in all appeals was below the prescribed limit for filing appeals by the Revenue. Since the Departmental Representative could not substantiate any exceptions to the circular, the appeals were dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue are maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circular, and whether any exceptions apply.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “I” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
therefore same were heard together and disposed off by way of this ore same were heard together and disposed off by way of this ore same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order for consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
At the outset, on perusal of the Form No. 36 filed by the At the outset, on perusal of the Form No. 36 filed by the At the outset, on perusal of the Form No. 36 filed by the Revenue in the various assessment years Revenue in the various assessment years, we find , we find that tax effect involved is below the threshold limit of Rs.60,00,000/ below the threshold limit of Rs.60,00,000/- prescribed below the threshold limit of Rs.60,00,000/ vide Circular No. by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide 09/2024 dated 17th th September, 2024. The year- -wise tax effect involved in these appeals involved in these appeals is reproduced as under:
Assessment Year Assessment Year Tax Effect (in Rs.) (in Rs.) 2017-18 36,92,503/- 36,92,503/ 2018-19 26,61,320/- 26,61,320/ 2019-2020 20,14,457/ 457/- 2020-21 22,23,166/- 22,23,166/ 2021-22 4,504/- 4,504/ 2.1 The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) however submitted 2.1 The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) however submitted 2.1 The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) however submitted that cases of the assessee falls under exceptions to the said that cases of the assessee falls under exception that cases of the assessee falls under exception Circular, but he could not substantiate his claim and therefore, the he could not substantiate his claim and therefore, the he could not substantiate his claim and therefore, the captioned appeals are held to be below the prescribed limit for filing captioned appeals are held to be below the prescribed limit for filing captioned appeals are held to be below the prescribed limit for filing appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal and hence same are appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal and hence same are appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal and hence same are dismissed as deemed to be deemed to be withdrawn. However, the Revenue is withdrawn. However, the Revenue is granted liberty to file liberty to file misc application for recall of the appeals if misc application for recall of the appeals if subsequently able to substantiate by way of documentary evidence subsequently able to substantiate by way of documentary evidence subsequently able to substantiate by way of documentary evidence
M/s Star Cruises (India) Travel Services Pvt. M/s Star Cruises (India) Travel Services Pvt. 3 Ltd.
5303, 5249, 5246 & 5303, 5249, 5246 & 5245/MUM/2024 that the cases falls in any of the exceptions provided in the CBDT in any of the exceptions provided in the CBDT in any of the exceptions provided in the CBDT Circular (supra).
In the result, all the appeals of the R In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. evenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court. Order pronounced in the open Court.