DCIT-1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S FORBES & CO. LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3912/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 November 2020AY 2015-163 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 noted that the tax effect on the disputed amount was below the revised monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakh as per the CBDT circular. Since no exceptions applied, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal challenging the relief granted by the CIT(A) on a disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Ms. Urvi Mehta
For Respondent: Shri Chintamani Dingankar

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the revenue challenging the order dated 29.03.2019, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2015–16.

2.

The dispute in the present appeal is confined to the relief granted by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on the issue of disallowance made under section 14A r/w rule 8D by the Assessing Officer.

2 M/s. Forbes & Co. Ltd.

3.

At the outset, the leaned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue in the present appeal is below the monetary limit of ` 50 lakh. Hence, she submitted that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) Circular no. no.17 of 2019, dated 8th August 2019. Further, she submitted, the appeal is not protected by any of the exceptions provided.

4.

The learned Departmental Representative agreed that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue is below the monetary limit of `.50 lakh.

5.

Having considered rival submissions and perused the material on record, we find from Col. No.10 of the appeal memo filed by the Revenue in Form no.36, the tax effect on the amount disputed by the revenue in the present appeal is ` 29,24,376, which is below the revised monetary limit of ` 50 lakh as per CBDT Circular no.17/2019, dated 8th August 2019. It also stands clarified by the CBDT that the revised monetary limit of ` 50 lakh as per the aforesaid CBDT Circular would also apply to all pending appeals. There is nothing on record to show that the appeal is protected by any of the exceptions provided in the circular. In view of the aforesaid, Revenue’s appeal deserves to be dismissed as withdrawn.

3 M/s. Forbes & Co. Ltd.

6.

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 25.11.2020

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →