Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S.SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. Assessment Year 2013-14 is filed by the ld ACIT, Circle-18(2), New Delhi against the order of the ld CIT(A)-6, Delhi dated 11.09.2017, wherein, following grounds of appeal are raised:-
1. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting disallowance of Rs. 23,63,350/- and Rs. 34,42,677/- u/s 37 (1) of the Act on account of Advertisement & Publicity expenses' and Repair & maintenance and Printing & stationery expenses respectively by ignoring the fact that during assessment proceeding the assessee could not discharge its initial onus even after providing sufficient opportunities of being heard by not furnishing complete detail and documents to prove that the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for business purpose of the assessee?
2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) is legally justified in allowing relief to the assessee u/s 37 (1) of the Act on the basis of its earlier order in the assessee's own case despite the fact that principle of res-judicata is not applicable to Income Tax proceedings as each assessment year is a separate year?”
2. The assessee is a company running a hospital. It filed its return of income declaring income of Rs. 3,38,43,817/- on 01.12.2013 which was assessed by order u/s 143(3) of the Act by the order dated 28.03.2016, wherein, the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 4,22,45,158/- making certain disallowances. The assessee preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A) which was partly allowed and therefore, the ld AO is in appeal before us contesting the deletion of disallowances of Rs. 23,63,350/- and Rs. 34,42,677/- u/s 37(1) of the Act.
At the time of hearing it was submitted that the assessee company has undergone the process of corporate insolvency resolution process under the provision of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 and therefore, no proceedings under the Companies Act can continue till the resolution process continues.
The ld DR was also questioned that the tax effect in the above appeal is only Rs. 4266410/- as mentioned in para No. 7 in the caption of the order of the ld CIT(A), therefore, it is a low tax effect.
We have carefully considered the rival contention and find that the appeal is low tax effect.
We find that the CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08th August 2019 has enhanced the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hon’ble High Courts and Hon’ble Supreme Court. The relevant para of the aforesaid circular is reproduced as under :- “2. As a step towards further management of litigation, it has been decided by the Board that monetary limits for filing of appeals in income-tax cases be enhanced further through amendment in Para 3 of the Circular mentioned above and accordingly, the table for monetary limits specified in Para 3 of the Circular shall read as follows: S.No. Appeals/SLPs in Income-tax Monetary Limit (Rs.) matters Before Appellate Tribunal 50.00,000 1. Before High Court 2. 1.00.00.000 3. Before Supreme Court 2.00,00.000 3. Further, with a view to provide parity in filing of appeals in scenarios where separate order is passed by higher appellate authorities for each assessment year vis-a-vis where composite order for more than one assessment years is passed, para 5 of the circular is substituted by the following para: "5. The Assessing Officer shall calculate the tax effect separately for every assessment year in respect of the disputed issues in the case of every assessee. If, in the case of an assessee. the disputed issues arise in more than one assessment year, appeal can be filed in respect of such assessment year or years in which the tax effect in respect of the disputed issues exceeds the monetary' limit specified in para 3. No appeal shall be filed in respect of an assessment year or y ears in which the tax effect is less than the monetary limit specified in para 3. Further, even in the case of composite order of any High Court or appellate authority which involves more than one assessment year and common issues in more than one assessment year, no appeal shall be filed in respect of an assessment year or years in which the tax effect is less than the monetary limit specified in para 3. In case where a composite order/ judgement involves more than one assessee. each assessee shall be dealt with separately.”