ITO, WARD-1(4), NEW DELHI vs. AGACHE ASSOCIATES, NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. This was because the tax effect in the appeal did not exceed the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars for filing appeals before the ITAT.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which directed the AO to treat income from warehousing as business income instead of income from house property. The appeal was filed for AY 2014-15.
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 by CBDT circulars.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
(A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 10.10.2017 for Assessment Year 2014-15. Grounds taken in this appeal of Revenue are as under:
“1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the AO to treat income from warehousing as business income instead of income from ‘House Property’ as held by the AO. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of business expenses of Rs. 60,88,025/- which was considered separately by the AO related to house property and not allowed as business expenses by the AO. Page 1 of 4
ITA No.- 1805/Del/2018. Agache Associates Pvt. Ltd. 3. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.”
(B) At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee brought to our notice, at the time of hearing, that tax effect in this appeal is Rs. 50,00,000/-. Both sides, [Representatives of Revenue and the Assessee] were in agreement, at the time of hearing before us, that the tax effect in the present appeal is 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 of 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. As the tax effect in this appeal does not exceed the aforesaid limit of Rs. 50,00,000/-; the learned Senior Departmental Representative (“Ld. Sr. DR”, for short) for Revenue did not press the appeal. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also submitted that the appeal was not maintainable in view of the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019 and 11.07.2018; and aforesaid clarification dated 20.08.2019 issued by CBDT. In view of the foregoing, this appeal is dismissed being not pressed and also being 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.
ITA No.- 1805/Del/2018. Agache Associates Pvt. Ltd. (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 this appeal if it is found that appeal of Revenue is not covered by aforesaid CBDT Circulars dated 08.08.2019 and 11.07.2018.
(D) In the result, this appeal by Revenue is 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 08/11/2019.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026