PR. CIT 9, MUMBAI vs. ASCENT HYDRO PROJECTS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6426/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 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 was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal on this ground, while granting liberty to the Revenue to seek restoration if exceptions apply.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee pointed out that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit set by the CBDT for filing appeals. The Departmental Representative admitted this fact.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit by the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI RAVISH SOOD

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Jain, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Ravinder Sindhu, D.R, Shri Pankaj Jain, A.R
Hearing: 14/01/2020Pronounced: 14/01/2020

ORDER

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM

1.

The present appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, [for short „CIT(A)‟], Mumbai, dated 30.08.2018, which in turns arises from the assessment order passed by the A.O under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (for short „Act‟), dated 31.03.2016.

2.

Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 has amended Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 for further enhancement of monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Department before the ITAT, High Courts and SLPs/Appeals before Supreme Court as measures for reducing litigation.

3.

CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 has specified that appeals shall not be filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs.20,00,000/-. For this purpose, „tax effect‟ means the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had such total income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of issues against which appeal is intended to be filed.

2 DCIT Circle 9(1)(2) Vs Ascent Hydro Project Pvt. ltd.

Further, „tax effect‟ shall be taxes including applicable surcharge and cess. However, the tax will not include any interest thereon, except where chargeability of interest itself is in dispute. In case the chargeability of interest is the issue under dispute, the amount of interest shall be the „tax effect‟. In cases where returned loss is reduced or assessed as income, the „tax effect‟ would include notional tax on disputed additions. In case of penalty order, the „tax effect‟ will mean quantum of penalty deleted or reduced in the order to be appealed against.

At para 13 of the above Circular, it has been mentioned that:

“13. This Circular will apply to SLPs/appeals/cross objection/references to be filed henceforth in SC/HCs/Tribunal and it shall also apply retrospectively to pending SLPs/appeals/cross objections/references. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.”

4.

As a step towards further management of litigation, CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 has fixed the monetary limit for filing of appeals before ITAT at Rs.50,00,000/-.

5.

In the instant appeal filed by the Department, the tax effect involved is below the monetary limit of Rs.50,00,000/-. In support of the said fact the Ld. A.R had placed on record a working of the „tax effect‟, which duly substantiates the aforesaid factual position. The same was brought to the notice of the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), who had admitted the said fact.

6.

Before us, the Ld. D.R submits that liberty may kindly be given to raise, after necessary further verification and to seek recall of the dismissal of appeal and its restoration, in case it can be shown that the appeal is covered by the exceptions.

7.

We agree with the above contentions of the Ld. DR and make it clear that the appellant shall be at liberty to point out the exceptions and we will take appropriate remedial measures in this regard.

8.

With the above observations the appeal involving a „tax effect‟ of less than Rs.50,00,000/- is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 14/01/2020.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →