ACIT- 6 (2)(2), MUMBAI vs. ENHANCE AMBIENT COMMUNICATION PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7204/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 December 2019AY 2010-113 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 dismissed the revenue's appeal because the tax effect of the penalty was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The revenue was granted liberty to seek recall if exceptions applied or the tax effect exceeded the limit.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the deletion of a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for bogus purchases. The penalty was for Rs. 24,190, and the disallowance was Rs. 78,283.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal is maintainable given the low tax effect and applicability of CBDT circulars regarding monetary limits for 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, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh-Ld. DR

सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 09/12/2019 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / 09/12/2019 : Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [in short referred 1. to as ‘AY’] 2009-10 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-12/DCIT-6(2)(2)/B2-140/15-16 dated 11/09/2018 qua deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Rs.24,190/- in respect of disallowance of Rs.78,283/- made in the assessment order on account of bogus 2 M/s. Enhance Ambient Communications Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year :2010-11 purchases. The stated penalty was imposed by Ld. Assessing Officer vide order dated 29/09/2015 but the same was deleted by first appellate authority, finding merits in assessee’ submissions. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us.

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee and no valid adjournment application is on record. Therefore, the matter was proceeded with ex-parte qua the assessee in view of the fact that the quantum of penalty being contested by revenue is less than monetary limit of Rs. 50 Lacs as prescribed by CBDT 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 in terms of the said circular. The Ld. DR was unable to point out any exception which would suggest that the benefit of said circular would not be applicable to factual matrix.

3.

Upon perusal of case records, prima facie, it appears that the tax effect of quantum of penalty 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. The aforesaid limits, as per para 13 of the Circular no. 3 of 2018 dated 11/07/2018, applies to pending appeals also. In view of the admitted position, we dismiss the revenue’s appeal.

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 →