JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) 9(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DICITEX FURNISHINGS LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 918/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 August 2019AY 2013-143 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The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn/not pressed, as their filing was not in consonance with the prevailing CBDT circulars regarding monetary limits for appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the CIT(A) orders for AY 2013-14. The tax effect in dispute was below the enhanced monetary limits for filing appeals specified by CBDT circulars.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the revised monetary limits for filing appeals as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri G.S. Pannu

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Hearing: 20.08.2019Pronounced: 20.08.2019

The captioned appeals filed by the Revenue pertaining to assessment years 2013-14, are directed against the orders passed by the CIT(A)-16, Mumbai dated 30.11.2017 which in turn arise out of orders passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") dated 14.03.2016.

2.

The CBDT, vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8th August, 2019, has amended para 3 of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 modifying the monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal. The tax effect in dispute in the captioned appeal is stated to be below the enhanced monetary limit of `50 lakhs specified in the CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019 (supra) read with circular 11.07.2018 (supra).

3.

In this background, the learned D.R. appearing for the Revenue was required to state his position; he has not referred to any material which Dicitex Furnishings Limited would show that the captioned appeal is protected by any of the exceptions provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra) and its amendment dated 20th August, 2018.

4.

Without going into the merit of the issues raised, the captioned appeal is deemed to be withdrawn/not pressed as it’s filing is not in consonance with the CBDT circular dated 08.08.2019 (supra) read with circular 11.07.2018 (supra). It is also noted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT & Ors vs. MSEB Holding Company Ltd. [SLP (Civil) No.26373/2019 dated 16.08.2019] has taken cognizance of the enhanced limit while dismissing the SLP arising from the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in WP No. 3642/2018 dated 25.01.2019.

5.

Before parting, we clarify that if on a later date, the Revenue finds that filing of the appeal is protected by any of the exceptions provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular 11.07.2018 (supra), it shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recall of the instant order and reinstitution of the appeal for adjudication on merits. The Tribunal shall consider such application, if any, as per the extant law.

6.

In conclusion, by applying the circular dated 08.08.2019 read with circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra), the captioned appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as withdrawn/ not pressed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →