ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. EIPR (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6418/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 August 2019AY 2012-133 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The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as withdrawn due to low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The Revenue was granted liberty to move for recalling the order if it was later found not to fall under the exceptions of the circular.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which deleted additions and disallowances made by the AO. The tax effect in the appeal was below the limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed on the grounds of low tax effect as per the prevailing CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Ashit R. Mehta, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, D.R
Hearing: 26.08.2019Pronounced: 30.08.2019

Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 17.07.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2012-13.

2.

At the outset, it is noticed that the AO made addition of unexplained expenditure amounting to Rs.57,36,209/- and made disallowance of Rs.7,14,850/-. The CIT(A) deleted the addition as well as disallowance made by the AO. It is further noticed that the CBDT recently has amended the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 amounting vide Circular No. 17/2019, F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt.) dated 08.08.2019 increasing the limit for filing of appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal i.e. Rs.50 lacs in each of the case. We noted that earlier Circular No. 3 of 2018 was made applicable to 2 M/s. EIPR (India) Ltd. pending appeals also and this clause of the circular remains unchanged even after the amendment. Admittedly, in this case tax effect is below prescribed limit for filing of appeal before the Tribunal by the Revenue i.e. Rs.50 lacs.

3.

When this was confronted to the learned Sr. Departmental Representative, he could not point out that this appeal falls under any of the exception as provided in Circular No. 17 of 2019. Admittedly, the tax effect in this appeal of Revenue is much below the prescribed limit of filing appeal before the Tribunal i.e. Rs.50 lacs as per CBDT circular No. 17 of 2019. In view of the above, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn in view of Circular No. 17 of 2019.

4.

Now, before us, the learned CIT Departmental Representative only requested that he want to verify whether this appeal falls under any of the explanation provided in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Here, we are of giving liberty to Revenue that in case, after passing of the order it comes to the notice of the Revenue that this appeal does not falls under any explanation of the CBDT by 3/18, the AO can move for recalling of the order within the prescribed time limit under section 254 of the Act. Hence, this appeal is dismissed as low tax effect covered by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.08.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →