ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 11(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VIDITI INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 876/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 August 2019AY 2014-153 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, citing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Appellate Tribunal to ₹.50,00,000. Since the tax effect was below this limit, the appeal was liable to be dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s decision regarding disallowance under Section 14A for AY 2014-15. The Assessing Officer had made a disallowance of ₹.92,56,708/-, but the tax effect was less than ₹.50 Lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed based on the revised monetary limits for filing appeals as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, given the tax effect was below the prescribed limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HONBLE & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HONBLE

For Appellant: Ms Swati Jagetia
For Respondent: Shri Rajiv Gubgotra
Hearing: 11.06.2019Pronounced: 28.08.2019

O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 06.10.2017 for the Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

Revenue has raised the following grounds in its appeal: -

1. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in relying on the decision of ITAT for AY 2011-12 in the assessee's own case. Department had not accepted the decision of Hon'ble ITAT for AY 2011- 12 on merit. However, the appeal was not filed because of low tax effect.

2. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has ignored that the decision given in assessment for the earlier year are not binding either on the assessee or the department in subsequent year. In the 2 ITA.NO.876/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/s. Viditi Investment Pvt. Ltd., decision of Radhasaomi Satsang, (2002-TTOL-745-SC-IT) the Hon'ble Supreme Court acknowledged that there is no res judicata, as regards assessment orders and assessment for one year may not bind the officer for the next year. This is consistent with the view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that "there is no such thing as res judicata in Income Tax matters."

3.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that identical issue has come up in assessee’s own case for the earlier Assessment Years i.e. A.Y. 2011-12 to 2013-14 and Tribunal for the A.Y. 2011-12 restricted the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act to the suomoto disallowance made by the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in so far as the A.Y.2012-13 and 2013-14 are concerned the Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the Revenue in ITA.No.7321/Mum/2017 and 7322/Mum/2017 dated 22.01.2019 as the tax effect is below ₹.20 Lakhs.

4.

Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. On a perusal of the Assessment Order, we find that the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment made disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act at ₹.92,56,708/-. The Revenue effect on this disallowance is less than ₹.50 Lakhs. The CBDT in its recent Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 amended its earlier Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 and revised the monetary limits for filing of appeals in income tax cases by the Revenue as under:

3 ITA.NO.876/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/s. Viditi Investment Pvt. Ltd., Appeals/SLPs in Income- S.No. Monetary Limit (Rs.) tax matters I. Before Appellate Tribunal 50,00,000 2. Before High Court 1,00.00.000 3. Before Supreme Court 2.00.00,000

Since in this case the tax effect in the Revenue’s appeal is less than ₹.50 Lakhs the Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 applies and the Revenue’s appeal is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn. Hence this appeal is dismissed.

6.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 28th August, 2019

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →