DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1(2), CHENNAI vs. M/S. COMPASS GROUP (INDIA) SUPPORT SERVICES PVT.LTD, (FORMERLY TIRUMALA HOSPITALITY SERVICES PVT.LTD.), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal without going into the merits of the case. This decision was based on the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, which sets a monetary limit for filing appeals.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an order of the CIT(A) that allowed the assessee's appeal on an issue concerning delayed payment of employee's contribution to ESIC and PF. The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 50 Lakhs.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circulars, despite the merits of the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI
आदेश / ORDER
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :
This appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 20-01-2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Pune for assessment year 2011-12.
2 ITA No.2086/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2011-12
The Ld. AR, Shri Gaurav Shrawagi submitted at the outset that the appeal of Revenue is liable to be dismissed on account of low tax effect in terms of recent CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, dated 08-08-2019. The Ld. AR submitted that the Department in appeal has assailing the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in allowing assessee’s appeal on the issue of addition u/s. 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act with regard to the delay in the payment of employee’s contribution to ESIC and PF.
The Ld. DR, Shri Pankaj Garg fairly admitted that in the present appeal by the Department tax effect is less than Rs.50 Lakhs.
Heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. The Ld. AR submitted that the Department in appeal has assailing the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in allowing assessee’s appeal on the issue of addition u/s. 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act with regard to the delay in the payment of employee’s contribution to ESIC and PF. Undisputedly, the tax effect involved in appeal is less than the monetary limit prescribed by the recent CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, dated 08-08-2019 for filing of appeals before the Tribunal by the Department. The CBDT vide circular dated 08-08-2019 (supra) has amended Para 3 of Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11-07-2018 thereby enhancing monetary limit of tax effect from Rs.20 Lakhs to Rs.50 Lakhs for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal. Thus, without going into merit of the issues raised in the appeal, in view of the CBDT Circular (supra) the present appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on account of low tax effect.
Before parting, we clarify here that the Revenue shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of appeal, with the requisite material
3 ITA No.2086/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2011-12
to show that the appeal is protected by the exceptions prescribed in Para 10 of the Circular dated 11-07-2018 and its amendment dated 20-08-2018.
In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18th September, 2019.
Sd/- Sd/- (R.S. Syal) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 18th September, 2019 RK आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. आयकर आयुक्त (अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A)-5, Pune 3. 4. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Pune ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “बी” बेंच, 5. ऩुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गार्ड फ़ाइऱ / Guard File. 6. //सत्यावऩत प्रतत// True Copy// आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
तनजी सधचव / Private Secretary, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune
More judgments on Section 2(24)(x)
- Bharata Thakrya Thakur, Nerul, Navi Mumbai vs Assistant Director of Income Tax, BengaluruITA 6024/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Bharat Thakrya Thakur, Nerul, Navi Mumbai vs Assistant Director of Income Tax, BengaluruITA 6023/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Bharat Thakrya Thakur, Nerul, Navi Mumbai vs Assistant Director of Income Tax, BengaluruITA 6022/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Bharat Thakrya Thakur, Nerul, Navi Mumbai vs Assistant Director of Income Tax, BengaluruITA 6021/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Manipal Technologies Limited, Manipal vs ITO 1 Udupi, UdupiITA 10/BANG/2026[2018-2019]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2018-2019
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026