ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. UMAXE PROJECTS, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6035/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 December 2019AY 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 held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circulars. The Departmental Representative also did not press the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition made by the AO. The appeal was filed despite the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars for filing appeals.

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 prescribed monetary limit. The substantive grounds of appeal related to job work payments and AO's additions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI

Before: H.S. SIDHU & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

[A]. This appeal has been filed by Revenue against the order dated 27.08.2016 passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, New Delhi [in short, “Ld.CIT(A)”] pertaining to assessment year 2011-12. Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) is correct in holding that the payment of Rs. 9 crores made by the assessee to one of its partners UPPL as job work even when the actual contract was awarded to the assessee and there did not exist sub-letting contract between the assessee and UPPL.

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition made by the AO basing his decision on the facts for A.Y. 2012-13 which are substantially different from the facts for A.Y. 2011-12, as for A.Y. 2012-13, the assessee had received total contract

ITA No: - 6035,6036/Del/2016 receipts of Rs. 35.94 crores from which deduction of Rs, 31.4 crores was made for material supply and only Rs. 3.49 crores was deducted as job work.

3.

Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case, Ld.CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition made by the AO without giving any finding of the AO that the appellant failed to comply with the Accounting Standard -7.

4.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition made by the AO without any finding even though the addition was made on the basis of the judicial decisions relied upon and applying the profit rate of 10% of the total receipts by the assessee by invoking provisions of section 145(3)/144 of the Income Tax Act. 1961.

[B]. At the outset, it was brought to our notice by learned Authorized Representative of the Assessee, at the time of hearing, that tax effect in this appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000./-. Vide recent CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with earlier CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, minimum threshold limit of tax effect for filing of appeals by Revenue in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT", for short) has been enhanced to Rs. 50,00,000/-. In a subsequent clarification issued by CBDT vide F.No. 279/Misc/M- 93/2018-ITJ, dated 20/08/2019, it has been clarified by CBDT that the aforesaid revised monetary limit is also applicable to all pending appeals in ITAT. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, we are of the view that this appeal filed by Revenue is not maintainable. The learned Departmental Representative also did not press the appeal.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed being not pressed, and also not maintainable, having regard to aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 in the light of aforesaid clarification dated 20/08/2019. Page | 2

ITA No: - 6035,6036/Del/2016 [C]. Before leaving, we clarify that Revenue will be at liberty to approach Income Tax Appellate Tribunal U/s 254(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking recall of this order and, for restoration of the appeal if it is found that this appeal of Revenue is not covered by aforesaid CBDT Circulars dated 08.08.2019 and 11.07.2018.

[D]. In the result, the appeals by Revenue are dismissed. Our decision was orally pronounced in the Open Court after conclusion of hearing on the date of hearing. Now, this written order is pronounced in Open Court on 4.12.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →