DCIT - CC- 4(3), MUMBAI vs. NILESH M.AGARWAL, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5055/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 February 2021AY 2011-123 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 agreed with the contention that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the appellant is at liberty to point out exceptions if any.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The Departmental Representative pointed out that the tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the ITAT given the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars for tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, D.R
Hearing: 04/02/2021Pronounced: 04/02/2021

ORDER

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM

1.

The present appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-52, [for short „CIT(A)‟], Mumbai, dated 01.06.2018, which in turns arises from the assessment order passed by the A.O under section 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Income Tax Act 1961, (for short „Act‟), dated 28.03.2016.

2.

Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 has amended Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 for further enhancement of monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Department before the ITAT, High Courts and SLPs/Appeals before Supreme Court as measures for reducing litigation.

3.

CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 has specified that appeals shall not be filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs.20,00,000/-. For this purpose, „tax effect‟ means the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had such total income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of issues against which appeal is intended to be filed. Further, „tax effect‟ shall be taxes including applicable surcharge and cess. However, the tax will not include any interest thereon, except where chargeability of interest itself is in dispute. In case the 2 DCIT,CC-4(3), Mumbai Vs. Shri Nilesh M. Agarwal chargeability of interest is the issue under dispute, the amount of interest shall be the „tax effect‟. In cases where returned loss is reduced or assessed as income, the „tax effect‟ would include notional tax on disputed additions. In case of penalty order, the „tax effect‟ will mean quantum of penalty deleted or reduced in the order to be appealed against.

At para 13 of the above Circular, it has been mentioned that:

“13. This Circular will apply to SLPs/appeals/cross objection/references to be filed henceforth in SC/HCs/Tribunal and it shall also apply retrospectively to pending SLPs/appeals/cross objections/references. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.”

4.

As a step towards further management of litigation, CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 has fixed the monetary limit for filing of appeals before ITAT at Rs.50,00,000/-.

5.

At the very outset, the ld. Departmental Representative (for short „D.R‟) had placed on record a letter dated 08.12.2020 of the DCIT, Central Circle-4(3), Mumbai, addressed to the CIT, DR- „B‟ Bench, Mumbai, wherein a working of the „tax effect‟ involved in the appeals filed by the revenue in the case of the assessee for A.Y.2010-11 to A.Y. 2014-15 was stated. Taking us through the said details, it was submitted by the ld. D.R that as the tax involved in the revenues appeal for A.Y. 2011-12 in i.e Rs.47,61,833/- was below the monetary limit of Rs.50 lac, as provided in the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, dated 08.08.2019, the same, thus, was not maintainable.

6.

Before us, the Ld. D.R submits that liberty may kindly be given to raise, after necessary further verification and to seek recall of the dismissal of appeal and its restoration, in case it can be shown that the appeal is covered by the exceptions.

7.

We agree with the above contentions of the Ld. DR and make it clear that the appellant shall be at liberty to point out the exceptions and we will take appropriate remedial measures in this regard.

8.

With the above observations the appeal involving a „tax effect‟ of less than Rs.50,00,000/- is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/02/2021.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →