DCIT, BANGALORE vs. KIRLOSKARTOYOTA TEXTILE MACHINERY PVT. LTD., BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 305/BANG/2015Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 April 2019AY 2009-103 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 held that the appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circulars for filing appeals. The circulars were also held to be applicable retrospectively.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The tax effect in dispute was Rs. 36,63,629/-.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal based on the tax effect and the retrospective applicability of CBDT circulars regarding monetary limits for appeals.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘ A ’

Before: SHRI JASON P BOAZ & SHRI LALIET KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri L. V. Bhaskar Reddy, Addl. CIT (D.R)

O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz, A.M. : This appeal at the instance of the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Bangalore dt. 19.12.2014 for Assessment Year 2009-10.

2 IT(TP)A No.305/Bang/2015

2.

The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue submits that in this appeal, the tax effect pertaining to the amount disputed by the Revenue (i.e., Rs.36,63,629/- as per AO’s order dated 16.03.2017 giving effect to CIT(A)’s impugned order) is less than the monetary limit of Rs.20 lakhs fixed by the CBDT in Circular No.03/2018, dt.11.07.2018, which is in supersession of its Circular No.21/2015 dt.10.12.2015, in relation to filing of appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Taking into consideration the above, and also the fact that the CBDT Circular under reference applies retrospectively even to pending appeals, we hold that the above listed appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed in limine.

3.

In the result, the above appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2009-10 is dismissed. Registry is directed to inform the parties accordingly.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24th April, 2019.

1.

Sd/- Sd/- (LALIET KUMAR) (JASON P BOAZ) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dt. 24.04.2019. *NS

3 IT(TP)A No.305/Bang/2015

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →