THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SHAH JIGEN HARSHVADAN, HUF, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 596/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 September 2018AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the tax effect being below the prescribed limit of Rs. 20 lacs as per CBDT Circular 3/2018. The case did not fall under any exemption clauses.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions related to capital gains and Section 50C. The assessee argued for dismissal based on low tax effect as per CBDT Circular 3 of 2018.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular 3/2018.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD ‘D’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Per Pramod Kumar, AM: 1. By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 13.12.2016, passed by the learned CIT(A), Ahmedabad-5 for the assessment year 2013-14, on the following grounds:

“(1) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.2,17,373/- made by the A.O. by not allowing indexation in respect of sale of Abhiship Shop No.5 while computing capital gain.

(2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.93,53,061/- made under section 50C of the IT Act. 1961, by considering impugned sales consideration as per the Jantri Value on the date of sale of agreement instead of on the date of registered sale deed in accordance with the section 50C of the Act without verifying whether the payment of Rs. 5 lakh was made thorough Account payee cheque or draft by electronic clearing system through a Bank a/c on or before date of agreement of sale.”

2.

At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the present appeal of the Revenue needs to be dismissed on account of low tax effect in view of the recent CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018. Learned Counsel for the assessee also submits that in the present case the tax effect is Rs.19,30,310/-, as per the working

I TA N o. 5 9 6 /A hd / 20 1 7 AC I T Vs . S h ri S h ah J ig e n H a rs h va d a n- HU F Ass e ss me n t Y ea r : 2 0 13 - 1 4 Page 2 of 2 placed on record, which is below the prescribed limit of Rs.20 lacs. The learned Departmental Representative fairly admitted that the tax effect is less than the limit prescribed by the aforesaid CBDT Circular.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that prima-facie this appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable in view of the recent CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 in F.No.279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt) dated 11th July, 2018, vide which it has been decided by the Board that no departmental appeals should be filed before the Tribunal if the tax effect by virtue of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)’s order is below Rs. 20 lacs. The Board has provided exemptions at clause (10) of the Instructions wherein it has been provided that these instructions will not be applicable, where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act/Rule is under challenge or where Board’s order, notification, instruction or circular has been held to be illegal or where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department or where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets/bank accounts etc. We find that the present case does not fall within the exemption clause and the tax effect is less than Rs.20 lacs. Therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable and hence dismissed.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 17th September, 2018

Sd/- Sd/-

Mahavir Prasad Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 17th day of September, 2018 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad

1.

Date of dictation: ................low tax effect covered by CBDT Circular..12.09.2018.... 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member: .. 12.09.2018..... 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: 17.09.2018…... 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement: . 17.09.2018.. 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk : . …17.09.2018…. 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk : ……………………………. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: …. 8. Date of Despatch of the Order: ………………......

More judgments on Section 50C

All 3,223 judgments and leading authorities on Section 50C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →