What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. This was done solely on the grounds of low tax effect, as the tax involved was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 11,14,509/- made by the AO. The addition was related to alleged misuse of the client code modification facility by the assessee.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars, without delving into the merits of the addition made by the AO.

DCIT vs Rosa Supply Company Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

For Appellant: Ms. Akshita Bhandari

For Respondent: Shri T Sankar, Sr, DR

Hearing: 02/02/2022Pronounced: 02/02/2022

O R D E R Per: Gagan Goyal (AM): This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 22/05/2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-26, Mumbai for the assessment year 2010-11.

2. The Revenue has raised the following effective grounds of appeal: “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing relief to the assessee to the extent impugned in the grounds enumerated below:

2 ITA 1393/Mum/2019 (1) (1) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing the A.O. to delete the addition of Rs.11,14,509/- on account of misuse of Client Code Modification facility carried out through broker M/s Maniput Investment Pvt Ltd (now known as Magnurn Equity Broking Ltd) without appreciating the fact the assessee has shifted his profit with the help of related concern M/s Maniput Investment Pvt Ltd and this activity was carried on continuously in an organized manner with a view to lessen the profit"? (2) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in holding that the addition made by the AO was solely on the basis of enquiries conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department without appreciating the fact that the A.O. made independent enquiries and reached the conclusion that assessee had misused Client Code Modification facility with the help of broker M/s Maniput Investment Pvt Ltd (now known as Magnum Equity Broking Ltd) and therefore treated the loss of Rs.11,14,509/- was due to misuse of Client Code Modification facility "? (3) The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT (A) on the above grounds be reversed and that of the Assessing officer be restored.”

Ms. Akshita Bhandari appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the appeal filed by Revenue is liable to be dismissed on account of low tax effect in the light of CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019.

3. Shri T Sankar representing the Department fairly admitted that the appeal filed by the revenue suffers from low tax effect.

Heard. Undisputedly, the tax effect involved in the appeal as per Form 36 is Rs.2,57,864/- i.e. far below the monetary limit specified by the CBDT vide Circular No.17/2019 (supra) for filing of appeals by the Revenue before the Tribunal. Thus, without going into the merits of the issue raised in appeal, the present appeal by Re venue 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 to 3 ITA 1393/Mum/2019 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 by Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday, the 02nd February, 2022.

DCIT 14 (3)(1), MUMBAI vs. ROSA SUPPLY COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments