ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S. KANHAIYAL LAL RAMESHWAR DASS, KOTA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 836/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 August 2018AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the threshold limit specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made on account of disallowances of expenses. The tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was below the threshold limit prescribed by CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the departmental appeal is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 836/JP/2018

Hearing: 20/08/2018Pronounced: 21/08/2018

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; ikWy jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 836/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 cuke Asstt. Commissioner of Income- M/s Kanhaiya Lal Vs. tax, Central Circle-3, Rameshwar Das, Kota Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABFK4323K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (CA) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 21/08/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT (A)- 04, Jaipur dated 02.04.2018 for Assessment Year 2013-14 wherein the Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 27,34,450/- made by AO on account of disallowance of 10% of Malwa Jharai, Machine Running & Maintenance and compressor Maintenance expenses.

2.

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,33,532/- made by AO on account of disallowance u/s 36(1)(v).

2 ITA No. 836/JP/2018 ACIT, Jaipur vs. Ms Kanhaiya Lal Rameshwar Das, Kota (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,11,905/- made by AO on account of disallowance of telephone & Mobile expenses.”

2.

The ld. D/R has submitted that the tax effect involved in the Revenue’s

appeal comes to Rs 13,68,206/- less than Rs 20 lacs which is prescribed threshold limit in terms of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018

issued in supersession of its earlier Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015.

3.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on

record. It is observed that the demand/ tax effect in the Revenue’s appeal in question is below Rs. 20.00 lacs. Under the powers vested by section

268A(1) of the IT Act, CBDT has recently issued Circular No. 3/2018 11th dated July, 2018 (F No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ(Pt)

instructing the authorities below that departmental appeal should

not be filed before ITAT where the demand/tax effect does not

exceed Rs. 20 lacs. The circular is specifically mentioned to be applicable for

all pending appeals.

4.

Subject to some exceptions, it is further directed by CBDT that all the

departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax effect is

not exceeding than 20 lacs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the

departmental representatives.

5.

The present appeal is not covered by any exceptions mentioned in the

said CBDT circular. Since the tax demand in dispute in this departmental

appeal is below the limit set out by CBDT for the appeal, the appeal of the

3 ITA No. 836/JP/2018 ACIT, Jaipur vs. Ms Kanhaiya Lal Rameshwar Das, Kota assessee is not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018. Accordingly the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed/withdrawn. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/08/2018.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; ikWy jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (Vijay Pal Rao) (Vikram Singh Yadav) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 21/08/2018 *Ganesh Kr. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- ACIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- M/s Kanhaiya Lal Rameshwar Das, Kota 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File { ITA No. 836/JP/2018} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 268A(1)

All 190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →