DCIT 9(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AIR WORKS INDIA (ENGINEERING ) P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4783/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 November 2019AY 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 prescribed monetary limit for appeals. Therefore, the revenue's appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against an order of the CIT(A) which deleted an addition of Rs. 61,66,088/- related to the upward adjustment for corporate guarantee fee. The tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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. This appeal by revenue under section 253 of Income Tax Act is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-55, [CIT(A)], Mumbai dated 31.03.2017, which in turn arises from the assessment order passed under section 143(3) rws 144C(3)(a) dated 27.04.2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite service of notice through RPAD. At the outset of hearing, we have noted that the ld CIT(A) deleted the only the addition of Rs. 61,66,088/- added on account of upward adjustment on account of Arms Length Price for corporate guarantee fee chargeable from associated enterprises of the assessee. Admittedly the tax effect involved in the present appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/- i.e. the monetary limit prescribed Mum 17-M/s Air works India (Engineering) Pvt. Ltd. by CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019. Therefore, either the revenue should withdraw the present appeal or would be dismissed.

3. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue after going through the grounds of appeal submitted that though the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than the monetary limit of tax effect fixed by CBDT in a recent circular, however, the revenue may be given liberty to get the appeal revived in case at the later stage it is discovered that the ground of appeal is covered by any exception clause of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July 2018 or the tax effect id more than Rs. 50 Lakhs.

4. Considering the facts and the submissions of the ld. DR for the revenue 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. However, the revenue is given liberty to get the appeal revived in case, if it is discovered that the present appeal is covered by any exception clause of CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11th July 2018.

5. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →