What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit and the appeal was not protected by any exceptions. Therefore, the Tribunal treated the appeal as withdrawn.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The Departmental Representative submitted that the tax effect of the disputed amount was below the revised monetary limit for appeals to the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the Tribunal considering the revised monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT circular.

DCIT vs Maharashtra Urban | ITAT Mumbai 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA

For Appellant: Shri Bhushan Sakpal

For Respondent: Smt. Jyothilakshmi Nayak

The captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 26th June 2018, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–22, Mumbai, pertaining to the assessment year 2013–14.

At the very outset, Smt. Jyothilakshmi Nayak, the learned Departmental Representative submitted, the tax effect on the amount disputed in the appeal is below the revised monetary limit of ` 50 lakh

2 Maharashtra Urban Infrastructure Development Co. Ltd. applicable to appeals before the Tribunal, as per CBDT Circular no.17 of 2019, dated 8th August 2019. In this context, she submitted a letter dated 20th January 2020, received from the DCIT, Circle–14(2)(1), Mumbai. On a perusal of the aforesaid letter, it is evident, the Assessing Officer has not only stated that the tax effect on the disputed amount is below the monetary limit as applicable to the Tribunal as per the Circular referred to above, but it has also been stated that the appeal is not protected by any of the exceptions provided under the said Circular.

The learned Authorised Representative has also agreed with the aforesaid submissions.

Considering the submissions of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties as well as the above referred letter of the Assessing Officer, we treat the appeal as withdrawn, hence, dismissed.

In the result, appeal sands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23.01.2020

DCIT- 14 (2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA URBAN, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments