Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JM)
O R D E R This is an appeal by the revenue against order dated 30.07.2019 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–12, Mumbai for the assessment year 2008-09.
At the outset, learned Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the appeal is not maintainable due to low tax effect. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) ITO Vs Late Shri Amarchand P. Shah, 820/Mum/2017 dated 08/07/2019; ii) ACIT Vs M/s. Nocil Steel, ITA no.3483/Mum/2017 dated 05.02.2020; iii) ITO Vs M/s. Nishdish Infrastructure P. Ltd., ITA no.6003/Mum/2017 dated 28.11.2019; iv) ACIT Vs M/s. Giriraj Civil Developers Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.1183/Mum/2017 dated 20.08.2019; v) ITO Vs Nidhi Premises Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.3607/Mum/2017 dated 05.02.2020 3. Whereas, learned Departmental Representative vehemently opposing the aforesaid contention, drew my attention to ground no. 5 contained in Assessment Year: 2008-09 authorization memo dated 13.11.2019 and submitted that the appeal is protected under the exception provided in paragraph 10(e) of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 as amended by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide letter dated 20.08.2018. Thus, he submitted, the appeal being covered under the aforesaid exception has to be decided on merits.
I have heard the appeal on the preliminary and limited issue of maintainability due to low tax effect as per the Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. As far as the quantum of dispute for computing tax effect is concerned, undisputedly, the total addition made by assessing officer (AO) in the assessment order is to the tune of Rs. 40,80,000/-. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has deleted the entire addition made by the AO. Therefore, admittedly, the tax effect on the amount disputed by the revenue in the present appeal is below the threshold limit of Rs. 50 lakh fixed in Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 for filing of appeal before the Tribunal. It is also a fact on record that the aforesaid appeal has been filed after the issuance of Circular No. 17/2019 referred to above. Therefore, there is no doubt that Circular No. 17/2019 would be applicable to the present appeal. Though, of course, it is also applicable to all pending appeals. The stand of the revenue is, the appeal is protected under the exceptions provided under paragraph 10(e) of CBDT Circular F No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ/(Pt.) dated 20.08.2018. Though, there is no specific ground in the grounds of appeal
regarding maintainability of the appeal, however, learned Departmental Representative has drew my attention to ground no. 5 of the grounds contained in the authorization memo.
5. Be that as it may, paragraph 10 (e) of the Circular noted above reads as under:- “10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect. Assessment Year: 2008-09 (e) Where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI/ED/DRI/SFIO/Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI)”
6. On a specific query from the Bench to demonstrate, whether the AO had received information from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies as mentioned in paragraph 10(e) (supra), the learned Departmental Representative drew our attention to paragraph 2.1 of the assessment order.