ITO 21(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RAHEJA ALTANTIS COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1976/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 September 2020AY 2015-162 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 since the tax effect was below the limit fixed by the CBDT for filing appeals before the ITAT, the revenue's appeal was not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- made under Section 68. The assessee's counsel argued that the tax effect was below the CBDT's monetary limit for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit set by the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Poojan Mehta
For Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Hearing: 10.09.2020Pronounced: 14.09.2020

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the revenue is directed against order of learned CIT-A dated 24.1.2019 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13.

The grounds of appeal read as under :-

“On the facts and circumstances of the case ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition u/s. 68 of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- with respect to the unsecured loans received by it, without appreciating that the retraction of statement is only an afterthought and the Assessing Officer was correct in the treatment of the unsecured loans considering the preponderance of probability”.

3.

At the outset Ld counsel of the assessee submitted that the tax effect in this case is below the limit of Rs50,00,000 fixed by CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 Dt 8/8 2019 for filing appeal before the ITAT. Hence Ld counsel submitted that this appeal by the revenue is not maintainable. Per contra 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.

5.

Accordingly the appeal stands dismissed as such.

Order pronounced on 14.9.2020.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →