THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN TILES LTD., AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 124/AHD/2020Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2005-063 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 appeals as not maintainable, accepting the assessee's contention regarding the CBDT circular and the tax effect.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the deletion of penalties by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that the appeals were hit by a CBDT circular revising monetary limits for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeals are maintainable in light of the revised monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT circular 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, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA&

For Appellant: Shri Assem L. Thakkar, CA
For Respondent: Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. DR, Shri Assem L. Thakkar, CA
Pronounced: 06.05.2022

PER BENCH:

The bunch of seven appeals have been filed by the Revenue are directed against the separate orders dated 15.11.2019 & 25.11.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Ahmedabad arising out of the penalty order all dated 27.02.2018 passed by the JCIT(OSD), Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively.

ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal):-

2.

The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are read as under:-

“1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts and in circumstances of the case by deleting the penalty of Rs.19,92,476/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y. 2005-06. 2. The CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts and in circumstances of the case by deleting the penalty of Rs.32,92,171/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y. 2006-07. 3. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that the Assessing Officer be restored.”

3.

At the time of hearing, it was submitted by the Ld.AR for the assessee that appeal filed by the Revenue is hit by recently issued CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08/08/2019 revising the previous thresholds pertaining to tax effects. As per aforesaid Circular, all pending appeals filed by Revenue are liable to be dismissed as a measure for reducing litigation where the tax effect does not exceed the prescribed monetary limit which is now revised at Rs.50 Lakhs. In the instant case, the tax effect on the disputed issues raised by the Revenue is stated to be not exceeding Rs.50 lakhs and therefore appeal of the Revenue is required to be dismissed in limine.

4.

The Learned DR for the Revenue fairly admitted the applicability of the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. However, it will be open to Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 the Revenue to seek restoration of its appeal on showing inapplicability of the aforesaid CBDT Circular in any manner.

5.

In the combined result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 06/05/2022 (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 06/05/2022TANMAY, Sr. PS आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

2.

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु"त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-

5.

"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

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 →