INCOME TAX OFFICER-15(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S.NISHDISH INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6003/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 November 2019AY 2010-114 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 held that the tax effect of the disputed amount was below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals before the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 100 Lacs made on account of unexplained share application money. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi – Ld. AR
For Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik – Ld. DR

आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer -15(2)(2) M/s. Nishdish Infrastructure P.Ltd. Room No.15B 410, Devarata Building बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road 4th Floor, Plot No.83 Vs. Mumbai- 400 020. Sector-17, Vashi Navi Mumbai- 400 705. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AADCN-0103-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri Dharan Gandhi – Ld. AR Revenue by : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik – Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 28/11/2019 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 28/11/2019 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2010-11 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai, [CIT(A)] Appeal No. CIT(A)-24/ITO- 15(2)(2)/IT-41/2016-17 dated 14/06/2017 qua deletion of addition of Rs.100 Lacs u/s 68 as made by Ld. AO on account of unexplained share application money.

2 Assessment Year :2010-11 M/s. Nishdish Infrastructure P.Ltd.

2.

The Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee, at the outset, submitted that the tax effect of quantum under dispute is less than monetary limit of Rs.50 Lacs as prescribed by Central Board of Direct Taxes in its recently issued Circular No.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 [F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-TTJ(Pt.) Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue] and therefore, the appeal is not maintainable.

3.

The Ld. DR controverted the same by submitting that the additions were made on account of unexplained share application money pursuant to search action being carried out by DGIT (Investigation) in the case of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and the factual matrix was covered by exception provided in CBDT Circular No. 23 of 2019 dated 06/09/2019 read with office memorandum dated 16/09/2019.

4.

Upon perusal of case records, prima facie, it appears that the tax effect being contested by the revenue is less than prescribed limit of Rs.50 Lacs and the same is covered by recently issued low tax effect Circular No.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes [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. Undisputedly, the factual matrix is not covered by any of the exceptions as provided in para-10 of Circular no. 3 of 2018 dated 11/07/2018. So far as the exceptions as provided in subsequent CBDT Circular No. 23 of 2019 dated 06/09/2019 read with office memorandum dated 16/09/2019 is concerned, upon perusal of the same, we find that the same applies only to cases involving bogus long term capital gains (LTCG) / Short Term Capital Loss (STCL) through 3 Assessment Year :2010-11 M/s. Nishdish Infrastructure P.Ltd. penny stocks and not applicable to the cases of unexplained share application money.

5.

We have gone through the circular and find that the tax effect in dispute is below prescribed limit of Rs.50 Lacs and the assessee stood benefitted by the above circular issued by CBDT wherein the minimum monetary limit for filing the appeals before various appellate authorities have been fixed as under: - S. No. Appeals/ SLPs in Income-tax Monetary Limit (Rs.) matters 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 50.00,000 2 Before High Court 1,00.00,000 3 Before Supreme Court 2,00.00,000

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →