DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. MIRAH DEKOR PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 163/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 March 2021AY 2012-132 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the tax effect was indeed below the limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning assessment year 2012-13. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the CBDT's monetary limit for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect is below the CBDT's prescribed monetary limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IA(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Dewani
For Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Srivastava
Hearing: 03.03.2021Pronounced: 04.03.2021

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :-

This appeal by the revenue is directed against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short learned CIT(A)] dated 15.10.2018 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13.

2.

The grounds of appeal

read as under :-

1. Whether on facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in directing that the losses of the eligible unit for the previous year though set off in that year against income need not be adjusted before allowing deduction u/s 801 A(5) of Rs. 1,49,92,4857-, which is against the decision of Special Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Gold Mines Shares & Finance 116 TTJ (Ahd.) SB 705?

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was justified in giving relief to the assessee on relying on the judgement in the case of Hercules Hoist Limited,[386 ITR 698] wherein the issue in case under consideration was not dwelt upon?

3.

At the outset learned Counsel of the assessee submitted that the tax effect in this case is below the limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- fixed by CBDT vide

2 M/s. Mirah Dekor Pvt. Ltd.

Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8/8 2019 for filing appeal before the ITAT. Hence this appeal by the revenue is not maintainable.

4.

Learned Departmental Representative could not dispute that the tax effect is below the said limit. He could not point out that the appeal falls in any of the exceptions carved in said circular.

5.

Upon careful consideration we find that as the tax effect is below the limit fixed by CBDT for filing appeals before the ITAT, this appeal by the revenue is liable to be dismissed in limine.

6.

Accordingly the appeal stands dismissed as such.

Pronounced in the open court on 4.3.2021.

More judgments on Section 80IA(5)

All 48 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IA(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →