Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” Bench, Mumbai
O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :-
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short learned CIT(A)] dated 27.2.2019 and pertains to A.Y. 2015-16.
The grounds of appeal
read as under :- “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in:
1. Deleting the addition of Rs.l,14,6O,684/- rightly made by the Assessing Officer on account of additional depreciation claimed by the assessee for purchase of assets from foreign country and which were installed at "ALPHARETTA", USA. 2.Allowing the assessee to produce any evidence before him which is in violation of Rule 46A(1) of the I. T.Rules 1962. 3.Admitting the evidences produced by the assessee without recording the reasons in writing for doing so which is in violation of Rule 46A(2) of the I. T. Rules 1962.
2 M/s. Epic Energy Ltd.
4.Admitting the evidences produced by the assessee without giving reasonable opportunity to the Assessing Officer to rebut the said, which is in violation of Rule 46A(3) of the I.T. Rules, 1962.”
At the outset, it is observed that the tax effect in this case is below Rs. 50,00,000 fixed by CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 Dt 8/8/2019 for filing appeal before the ITAT. Hence 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.
Upon careful consideration we find that, as the tax effect is below the limit fixed by CBDT for filing appeals before the ITAT. Hence 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 by placing the result on notice board on 05.11.2020.