THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. PARAG RAMESHBHAI SHAH, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3675/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 August 2018AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the applicability of the CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, which mandates dismissal of appeals with a tax effect below a certain threshold. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which restricted disallowance of interest expenses and deleted an addition made under Section 68. The assessee argued that the appeal was hit by a CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable in light of the CBDT circular on monetary limits for appeals and the tax effect of the disputed issues.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(iii),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Dave, Sr. D.R, Shri P. B. Parmar, A.R

आदेश/O R D E R

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 28.10.2015 arising in the assessment order dated 20.02.2015 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3)

ITA No.3675/Ahd/15 [I.T.O. vs. M/s. Parag Rameshbhai Shah] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 -

of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue reads as under:-

“1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the disallowance of interest expenses u/s 36(1)(iii) to the extent of Rs.1,36,672/- as against Rs.3,61,408/-, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.40,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record.”

3.

At the time of hearing, it was submitted by the Ld.AR for the assessee that the appeal filed by the Revenue is hit by recently issued CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11/07/2018 revising the previous thresholds pertaining to tax effects. As per aforesaid Circular, all pending appeals filed by Revenue are liable to be dismissed as a measure for reducing litigation where the tax effect does not exceed the prescribed monetary limit which is now revised at Rs.20 Lakhs. In the instant case, the tax effect on the disputed issues raised by the Revenue is stated to be not exceeding Rs.20 lakhs and therefore appeal of the Revenue is required to be dismissed in limine.

4.

The Learned DR for the Revenue fairly admitted the applicability of the CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018. Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. However, it will be open to the Revenue to seek restoration of its appeal on

ITA No.3675/Ahd/15 [I.T.O. vs. M/s. Parag Rameshbhai Shah] A.Y. 2012-13 - 3 -

showing inapplicability of the aforesaid CBDT Circular in any manner.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 21/08/2018

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 21/08/2018

More judgments on Section 36(1)(iii)

All 3,665 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →