ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI vs. TIMES INTERNET LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3123/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 July 2021AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable as the tax effect involved was less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. This circular mandates that appeals should not be filed before the ITAT unless the tax effect exceeds Rs. 50 lakhs.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The grounds of appeal pertained to disallowances made by the AO concerning Section 14A, sale of content, software expenses, depreciation, and consultancy expenses.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the ITAT due to the low tax effect, as per the prevailing monetary limits set by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Gupta, C.A, Ms. Neha Gupta, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Thakur, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 28.07.2021Pronounced: 28.07.2021

ORDER

PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 29.01.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. “The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case in not appreciating the fact that AO made the disallowance in accordance with sec. 14A r.w.r 8D of the I.T Act only.

2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case by deleting the addition made by the AO on account of 2 disallowance of expenses on account of sale of content.

3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case by deleting the addition made by the AO on account of software expenses.

4. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case by deleting the addition made by the AO on account of depreciation claim of software.

5. The Ld.CIT (A) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case by partly allowing the addition made by the AO on account of consultancy expenses of legal and professional expenses.”

3.

Before us, at the outset, Ld. A.R. submitted that in the impugned appeal of Revenue, the tax involved is less than the monetary limit of Rs.50 lakh and therefore, the appeal is not maintainable. Learned DR did not controvert the submissions made by Learned AR.

4.

We have heard the rival parties 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 appeals 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 appeals are 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 3 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, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.07.2021, immediately after conclusion of the hearing of the matter in virtual mode.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →