ASST. CIT, CIRCLE-7(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S PINE BRIDGE INVESTMENT CAPITAL (I) PVT LTD. [FORMALY KNOWN AS AIG CAPITAL INDIA PVT, LTD.], MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1725/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 October 2020AY 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 held that the revenue's appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting a disallowance of expenses. The assessee claimed expenses related to employee benefits and other operational costs.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the revenue's appeal due to a low tax effect. The allowability of expenses claimed by the assessee was also a ground raised by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Vikas Kalmane
For Respondent: Shri Uodal Raj Singh
Hearing: 06.10.2020Pronounced: 06.10.2020

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the revenue is directed against order of learned CIT(A) dated 29.10.2018 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13.

2.

The grounds of appeal read as under :-

1. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1,30,29,721/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee company has not received any income from NBFC activity and thereby eligible for claiming expenses on account of employee benefit expenses and other expenses.

2. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in allowing the expenses u/s. 37(1) of the I.T Act by placing reliance on the decision of ITAT for A.Y. 2009-10 in assessee’s own case where the Hon'ble ITAT has remanded back the issue of allowability of revenue expenditure.

3.

At the outset we note that the tax effect in this case is below the limit of Rs 50,00,000/- fixed by CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8.8.2019 for filing appeal before the ITAT. Hence we find that this appeal by the revenue is not maintainable. Ld DR 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

4.

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. Accordingly the appeal stands dismissed as such.

Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the ITAT Rules on 06.10.2020.

More judgments on Section 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →