What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the revenue's appeal was not maintainable due to low tax effect, as it fell below the monetary threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The revenue was granted liberty to seek recall if exceptions applied or the tax effect exceeded the limit.

The revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee did not appear for the hearing. The ITAT noted a typographical error in the assessee's name on Form-36.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the revenue's appeal based on the low tax effect threshold as per CBDT circulars.

ITO vs Shri. Dhirajlal Premji Gala | ITAT Mumbai 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh-Ld. Sr. DR

O R D E R PER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (AM) 1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year 2014-15 contest the order of learned first appellate authority on certain grounds of appeal. Upon perusal of Form-36, it is noted that the name of the assessee has erroneously been written as Shri Hiralal M.Jain. However, assessee’s particulars in Authorization Memo have correctly been written. Therefore, finding mere typographical error in Form No.36, we ignore the same and proceed to dispose- off the appeal.

At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. However, the matter was proceeded with since the revenue’s appeal, prima-facie, is not maintainable in terms of low tax effect circular No. 17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 [F.No.279/Misc. 142/2007- TTJ(Pt.) issued by CBDT.

We find that the tax effect of disputed addition is below threshold monetary limit of Rs.50 Lacs and the appeal is not maintainable in terms of recently issued low tax effect Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 [F.No.279/Misc. 142/2007-TTJ(Pt.) issued by CBDT. This recent circular further enhances the monetary limit fixed in earlier Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11/07/2018 issued by CBDT as amended on 20/08/2018. In view of the same, the appeal is not maintainable. 4. At the same time, a liberty is given to revenue to seek recall of the appeal, if at a later stage, it is found that the matter is covered by any exceptions provided in any of the circular or in case the tax effect in the appeal exceeds the prescribed monetary limit. 5. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 28th December, 2020. (C.N.Prasad) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) न्यायिक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; यदनांक Dated : 28/12/2020 Sr.PS, Sudip Sarkar आदेशकीप्रधिधलधपअग्रेधर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी/ The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी/ The Respondent

ITO-19(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. SHRI. DHIRAJLAL PREMJI GALA, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments