ACIT 32(2), MUMBAI vs. LAXMI MANOHARLAL CHATURVEDI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4008/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 January 2020AY 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 noted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit set by the CBDT. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of additions made under Section 68 by the Assessing Officer. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue 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 68,Section 254(1),Section 253

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

1. 1. This appeal by revenue under section 253 of Income Tax Act is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, [CIT(A)], Mumbai dated 20.03.2017 for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2. At the outset of hearing, the ld. Authorized representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is is below the monetary limit of Rs.50,00,000/- prescribed by CBDT in its Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019. The ld. AR of the assessee further submits that the additions under section 68, deleted by ld CIT(A) was only Rs. 85 lacks, thus, admittedly the tax effect involved in the Smt Laxmi Manoharlal Chaturvesi present appeal is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. Therefore, the present appeal is squarely covered by the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8th August 2019 and is liable to be dismissed.

3.

On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue after going through the working of the tax agreed that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than the monetary limit of tax effect fixed by CBDT in a recent circular. The ld. DR submits that the assessee is beneficiary of tax evasion.

4.

During the hearing we enquired from the parties if the additions are base on the basis of information received from external sources or the assessment was reopened on the basis of internal information of the investigation wing. The ld. DR submits that the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of internal information of investigation wing of the income tax department.

5.

We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the order of the lower authorities. We have noted that the AO made additions under section 68 of Rs. 85 Lacks in the assessment order. On appeal before ld CIT(A) the additions were deleted. Considering the submissions of both the ld. representatives of the parties, we find that tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- fixed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, therefore, the appeal of revenue is dismissed being not maintainable. In the result, 2

Smt Laxmi Manoharlal Chaturvesi appeal of the revenue is dismissed due to tax effect being not maintainable.

6.

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →