ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GLOBUS SECURITIES & FINANCE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3593/DEL/2010Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 December 2018AY 2006-074 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 appeal filed by the Revenue. This was based on a CBDT circular stating that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakhs should not be filed or pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 51,10,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The addition was on account of alleged bogus share capital/premium received by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the departmental appeal is maintainable given the tax effect and CBDT circular instructions regarding pending appeals with low tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: ‘C’, NEW DELHI

For Respondent: DR Assessee by : Sh. Sanat Kapoor, Adv
Hearing: 29/11/2018Pronounced: 07/12/2018

Income Tax Officer, vs. M/s Globus Securities & Ward 12(2), Finance Pvt. Ltd., C.R. Building, 201, Ram Vihar, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAACG3346G (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Assessee by : Sh. Sanat Kapoor, Adv. Date of Hearing : 29/11/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 07/12/2018 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by revenue against order dated 07.05.2010 passed by Ld. CIT (A)-15, New Delhi for assessment year 2006-07 on following grounds of appeal:

1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 51,10,000/- on account of bogus share capital/premium u/s 68 of the I.T. Act received by the assessee during the year.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 51,10,000/- made u/s 68 of I.T. Act ignoring the fact that assessee had failed to prove creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction thereby not discharging the onus cost on it by Law. 3. The appellant craves to add, alter, amend, delete or withdraw any ground of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings.” 1

Globus Securities & Finance Pvt.Ltd.

2.

At the outset, Ld.AR submitted that tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs. 20 Lacs and, therefore, present appeal stands covered by recent circular issued by CBDT and deserves to be dismissed.

3.

Ld. Sr. DR though objected to the same could not controvert that tax effect involved in present appeal is less than Rs. 20 Lacs. 4. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 4.1 It is observed that total addition made by Ld.AO under section 68 of the Act amounts to Rs.51,10,000/-. Admittedly, tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs. 20 Lacs. 5. We are, therefore, dismissing appeal filed by revenue as it squarely gets covered by recent circular issued by CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, it has been directed that the Department shall not file appeal before the Tribunal in case where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs. It is also directed that this Instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in Tribunals. Pending appeals below this specified tax effect may be withdrawn/not pressed. Ld. DR in view of the Board Circular above did not press the departmental appeal. The case of the Department would not fall in the exceptions provided in the above Board Circular.

6.

In the result, the departmental appeal is not maintainable as the appeal is filed against the Board Instructions referred to Globus Securities & Finance Pvt.Ltd.

above. Therefore, the departmental appeal is dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07/12/2018

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →