What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the tax effect was below the prescribed limit for filing appeals. Since the Revenue could not demonstrate any exception to the circular, the appeal was dismissed.

The Revenue appealed the deletion of an addition of Rs. 1,28,21,750/- by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the monetary limit for filing appeals before the ITAT as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the ITAT due to the tax effect being below the monetary threshold set by the CBDT.

ACIT vs Parmar Build Tech | ITAT Mumbai 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Shah

For Respondent: Shri Vipul Shah

Hearing: 14.12.2020

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Asst. CIT-33(2) M/s. Parmar Build Tech R. No. 608, 6th Floor, Parmar Estate, Parekh Nagar, Vs. Pratakshyakar Bhavan, Swami Vivekanand School, BKC, Mumbai-400 051 Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400 067 PAN/GIR No. AAJFP 2574 P (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri Smita Verma Appellant by Respondent by : Shri Vipul Shah Date of Hearing : 14.12.2020 : 14.12.2020 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.:

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-45, Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short) dated 23.02.2018 and pertains to the assessment year (A.Y.) 2012-13.

The issue raised is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,28,21,750/-.

This appeal was earlier disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 18.06.2019. Subsequently, the said order was recalled in a MA order dated 23.10.2020. Pursuant to this recall this appeal is heard.

At the outset, the ld. 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 Circular No. 17/2019, order dated 08.08.2019 for filing the appeal before the ITAT. Hence, the ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that this appeal by the Revenue is not maintainable.

Per contra, the ld. Departmental Representative (ld. DR for short) 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 the said circular.

(A.Y. 2012-13) Asst. CIT vs. M/s. Parmar Build Tech 6. Upon careful consideration, we find that as the tax effect is below the limit fixed by CBDT for filing the 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 Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1962, by placing the details on the notice board on 14.12.2020

ACIT 33(2), MUMBAI vs. PARMAR BUILD TECH, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments