DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT-1, MUMBAI vs. RASHTRIYA CHEMICALS & FERTILIZERS LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4264/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 September 2019AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not maintainable due to the low tax effect, aligning with the CBDT circular. The Revenue was granted liberty to file a miscellaneous application if exceptions applied.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which partly allowed the assessee's appeal. The assessee pointed out that the tax effect was below Rs. 50 lacs, making the appeal not maintainable as per a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect below the revised monetary limit set by the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32(1)(iia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved (AR)
For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR), Shri Ketan Ved (AR)
Hearing: 04/09/2019Pronounced: 04/09/2019

O R D E R

PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM

1.

This appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order dated 19.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 (for short ‘the CIT (A), Mumbai, for the assessment year 2013-14, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’).

2.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals), the revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal on the following effective ground:-

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the ld. CIT (A) erred in extending the benefit of section 32(1) (iia) of the Act to the next assessment year, when the Income-tax Act does not provide such carryover, thereby violating the legal principle of “cassus omissus which states that the courts cannot compensate for what the legislature has omitted to enact? Assessment Year: 2013-14

3.

At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the respondent/assessee pointed out that the tax effect of the relief granted by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is below Rs. 50 lacs and as per Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the CBDT has revised the monetary limit for filing appeals before the ITAT from the existing limit of Rs. 20 lacs to Rs. 50 lacs. In the light of the aforesaid facts, the Ld. counsel submitted that this appeal is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.

More judgments on Section 32(1)(iia)

All 553 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32(1)(iia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →