ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VIPRA CLOSURES P. LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5312/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 August 2019AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the prescribed limit for filing appeals before the ITAT. The Revenue's counsel could not point out any exceptions to the circular. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an order of the CIT(A) which deleted an addition of unexplained cash credit by way of share capital and share premium. The tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the low tax effect as per CBDT circulars. Whether the appeal falls under any exceptions to the CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3),Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, DR
Hearing: 27.08.2019Pronounced: 27.08.2019

v/s Vipra Closures Pvt. Ltd. B-601, Waterford, Behind Navnit Motors, Andhri (W), Mumbai-400 058 …………….Respondent अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant by : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, DR प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent by : Shri Deepak Tralshawall, AR ुनवाई की तारीख / Date of hearing: 27.08.2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement : 27.08.2019 AadoSa / O R D E R महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य/ PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal of Revenue is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai in 18/IT-153/AC-11 (3)(2)/15-16 dated 27.04.2017. The Assessment was 2 | P a g e framed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 11(3)(2), Mumbai (in short ACIT/ ITO/ AO) for AY 2012-13 vide dated 20.03.2015, under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, it is noticed that the AO made addition of unexplained cash credit by way of share capital and share premium under section 68 of the Act amounting to ₹ 1,26,00,000/- which is deleted by the CIT(A). The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the tax effect, which is below the low tax effect as prescribed vide CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 vide F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt.) dated 08.08.2019, wherein the monetary limit for filing of appeal before ITAT is enhanced to ₹ 50 lacs. We noted that vide this circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 a amendment was made to CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 vide F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt) increasing the monetary limit for filing of appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal i.e. ₹ 50 lacs in each of the case from the monetary limit of ₹ 20 lacs. We noted that earlier Circular No. 3 of 2018 was made applicable to 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. ₹ 50 lacs.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →