DCIT-24(1), MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, MUMBAI vs. AKRUTI JAY CHANDAN JOINT VENTURE, MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “A” Bench, Mumbai.
Before: Smt. Beena Pillai (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM)
Per Bench :- The Revenue filed an appeal in the above-captioned case, with the following Grounds of appeal :- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,72,24,800/- on account of project management fees paid to Shri Jayesh D. Shah amounting to Rs. 1,72,24,800/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to submit the details called by the AO.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the fact that any expenditure (not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee) laid out or expended fully or exclusively for the purpose of business of the assessee. Nothing has been brought on record by the assessee showing that the above expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of the assessee.
Akruti Jay Chandan Joint Venture
2
2. From the Form No. 36 filed by the Revenue, it is observed that the tax effect involved in this appeal is Rs. 58,54,710/-. As per the CBDT Circular,
No. 09 OF 2024 dated 17.09.2024, the monetary limits to file an appeal by the Revenue before the ITAT were fixed at Rs. 60 lakhs. As the tax effect is less than Rs. 60 lakhs, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The Ld. DR has not objected to the same in view of the CBDT circular.
The Revenue’s appeal is dismissed.
ITA No. 4189 & 4091/Mum/2023
These appeals were filed by the Revenue and during the hearing before the Bench, the Ld. AR of the appellant has submitted that the appellant has desired to avail the benefits of DTVSV. In proof the same, the Ld. AR of the appellant has filed a copy of Form No. 1 dated 31.12.2024 issued by the Income Tax Department. As the appellant intends to avail DTVSV, the apepals of the Revenue become infructuous and dismissed. For any reason, if the VSV application was not accepted by the Department, the Revenue is at liberty to recall this order.
The Revenue’s appeals are infructuous and hence dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 29/01/2025. (BEENA PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 29/01/2025
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
Akruti Jay Chandan Joint Venture
3
5. Guard file.
BY ORDER,
////
(