Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON’BLE & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON’BLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5626/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer– 27(1)(4) v. M/s. Elite Electricals Tower No. 6, 4th Floor, Room No. 409 4, Ganga Annex, Nava Shrinagar CHS Vashi Rly. Station Complex P.L. Lokhande Marg, Chembur Vashi, Navi Mumbai Mumbai – 400 089
PAN: AABFE5409Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Maurya Pratap
Date of hearing : 03.12.2019 Date of pronouncement : 03.12.2019
O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 29.06.2018 for the Assessment Year 2010-11.
The Revenue in its appeal has raised the following grounds: - "1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the Penalty levied of Rs. 69,104/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the IT Act as the penalty was levied on quantum additions made on account of bogus purchases, without appreciating that the onus was on the assessee to establish the genuineness of such purchases by
2 ITA No. 5626/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2010-11) M/s. Elite Electricals producing such parties before the Assessing officer and the assessee failed to discharge its onus? 2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in holding that the AO had made adhoc additions without appreciating that the AO had levied penalty, only after verifying the fact that the assessee evaded the taxes on quantum of additions made on account of bogus purchases and the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of such purchases? 3) The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above grounds be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 4) The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add a new ground which may be necessary.”
At the time of hearing, when it was pointed out to the Ld. DR that the revenue effect in this appeal is below ₹.50 Lakhs the Ld. DR though agreed that tax effect on the issue in the present appeal is below ₹.50 Lacs and in view of the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 in F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt), the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable, it is submitted that this appeal is filed against deletion of penalty of ₹.69,104/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on the disallowance made towards bogus purchases.
We have heard the submissions and perused the grounds of appeal in this appeal. We find that the tax effect in this appeal is less than ₹.50 Lakhs and therefore the appeal of the revenue is not maintainable on account of low tax effect in view of the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. We also observed that since the issue is in respect of
3 ITA No. 5626/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2010-11) M/s. Elite Electricals levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act none of the exception in the circular are applicable. Hence this appeal is dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
Order Pronounced in the Open Court on the 03rd December, 2019
Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (C.N. PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai / Dated 03/12/2019 Giridhar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER,
(Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mum