THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TARN TARAN vs. SH. MANJINDER SINGH SIDHU, TARN TARAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 464/ASR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 July 2018AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's contention regarding the low tax effect to be correct. The Departmental Representative also conceded to the factual position.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) that allowed the assessee's appeal. The assessee contended that the appeal was not maintainable due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect is below the threshold stipulated by Section 268A of the Income Tax Act and relevant CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (SMC

Before: SH. SANJAY ARORA

Hearing: 26.07.2018Pronounced: 26.07.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (SMC) BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 464(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12

Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sh. Manjinder Singh Sidhu, Ward-2, Tarn Taran Shop No.158, New Grain Market, Tarn Taran [PAN: AWDPS3728G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Sh. A.N.Mishra (DR) Respondent by: None Date of Hearing: 26.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 26.07.2018

ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue agitating the Order dated 21.06.2016 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Amritsar (‘CIT(A)’ for short), allowing the assessee’s appeal contesting his assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 27.03.2014 for assessment year 2011-12.

2.

None appeared for and on behalf of the assessee-respondent when the appeal was called out for the hearing. However, the assessee has, through his counsel, citing Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018, issued by the CBDT, New Delhi, claimed that the tax-effect of the Revenue’s appeal is below Rs.20 lacs, and that, therefore, the instant appeal is not maintainable u/s 268A of the Act.

2 ITA No.464(Asr)/2016 (AY 2011-12) ITO v. Sh. Manjinder Singh Sidhu 3. The assessee’s contention is, on a perusal of the record, found to be correct; the total tax payable pursuant to assessment, as worked out by the Assessing Officer himself at the last page of the assessment order, being at Rs.14.14 lacs. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on this being put to him, would also concede to this being the factual position. Under the circumstances, the Revenue’s instant appeal is being dismissed in limine as not maintainable in view of sec. 268A of the Act. I decided accordingly.

4.

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the open court on July 26, 2018 Sd/- (Sanjay Arora) Accountant Member Date: 26/7/2018 PK/ PS. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) Sh Sh. Manjinder Singh Sidhu, Shop No.158, New Grain Market, Tarn Taran (2) The ITO, Ward-2, Tarn Taran (3) The CIT(A)-1, Amritsar (4) The CIT/CCIT, concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy

By Order

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →