What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the tax effect of the appeal was below ₹.50 Lakhs. Therefore, in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, the appeal of the Revenue was not maintainable.

The Revenue appealed the deletion of a disallowance made by the Assessing Officer regarding a payment of ₹.1,30,80,781/- to customers for a cancelled project. The assessee argued the payment was justified by commercial expediency.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

DCIT vs National Standard India Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON’BLE & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Aarti Sathe

For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Hearing: 09.08.2019Pronounced: 24.09.2019

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)-49, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT(A)-49/IT-76/2015-16 dated 26.04.2017 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds in its appeal: - 1(a). "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of ₹.1,30,80,781/- made

(A.Y: 2012-13) M/s. National Standard India Ltd. by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the payment of the said amount to the customers/buyers in the cancelled project was justified by commercial expediency and was laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the assessee." 1 (b). "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the agreement with the customers/buyers in the cancelled project did not stipulate any payment of compensation."

1 (c) " On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had cancelled the project 'Lodha Excellencia' and decided to come up with a new project by utilizing more FSI and increasing the saleable area and on that account the payment of compensation of Rs. 1,30,80,781/-could best be termed as capital outlay for a new project and hence, disallowable as revenue expenditure."

At the time of hearing, Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that tax effect on the issue in the present appeal is ₹.40,41,961/- which 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.

Departmental Representative also agreed with the above submission of the Authorized Representative of the assessee.

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

(A.Y: 2012-13) M/s. National Standard India Ltd. on account of low tax effect in view of the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. Hence this appeal is dismissed.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on the 24th September, 2019.

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments