THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. MAMTA RAJIVKUMAR AGARWAL, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 271/AHD/2020Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 June 2022AY 2013-142 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 appeal was not maintainable due to the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which enhanced the mandatory limit for revenue appeals. The appeal was dismissed as per the circular.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the deletion of penalty by the CIT(A). The penalty amount was Rs. 11,64,099/-. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable in light of the revised monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 for filing appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-

Hearing: 09/06/2022Pronounced: 15/06/2022

O R D E R

PER P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT :

1.

The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-10 (“CIT(A)” in short) dated 20.02.2020 passed for Assessment Year 2013-2014.

2.

The ground taken by the Revenue is as follows:- “The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in the facts and in circumstances of the case by deleting the penalty of Rs.11,64,099/- under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, 1961.”

3.

At the time of hearing before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee; however, since the issue in question is covered by CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, this appeal is decided ex-parte qua the assessee, after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record.

4.

Having heard the learned Departmental Representative and having perused the material on record, we find that this appeal of the Revenue is no longer maintainable in view of the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. The mandatory limit for cases in which Revenue can challenge the relief granted by the CIT(A) now stands enhanced to Rs.50 lakhs. This concession granted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is retrospective in effect inasmuch as it

ITO Vs. Smt. Mamta Rajivkumar Agarwal AY : 2013-14 2 applies to all pending appeals as well. In view of the above position, the appeal of the Revenue is no longer maintainable and is dismissed as such.

5.

It is, however, made clear that on re-verification at the end of the Assessing Officer if it comes out that the tax effect of more than Rs.50 lakhs is being involved in the appeal or the appeal falls within the exemption clause of the Circular, then the Revenue will be at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application to recall the Tribunal order. The application should be filed within the time limit prescribed in the Act.

6.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 15th June, 2022 at Ahmedabad.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →