ACIT-27(3), MUMBAI vs. SMT.SOSARDEVI GANESHLAL KACHHARA, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4414/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 July 2019AY 2011-123 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 agreed with the assessee and the Departmental Representative that the appeals were not maintainable due to low tax effect. The additions deleted by the CIT(A) were all less than ₹10 Lakhs, resulting in a tax effect below ₹20 Lakhs.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of additions made on account of alleged bogus unsecured loans. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below ₹20 Lacs, making the appeals not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeals are maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect of the deleted additions is below the threshold specified by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Jayant R. Bhatt
For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Hearing: 22.07.2019Pronounced: 22.07.2019

O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) All these appeals are filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT(A)-25/IT - 427, 428 & 429/16-17 dated 04.04.2019 for the Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13.

2.

The Revenue has raised the following common grounds in its appeals except for figures: -

2 4414 & 4415/MUM/2018 Sosardevi Ganeshlal Kachhara “(i). On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the substantive addition of interest expenses for ₹.5,40,000/- u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, claimed on the bogus & unexplained unsecured loans. (ii) The appellant craves leave to amend, modify and alter any grounds of appeal during the course of hearing of this case.”

3.

At the time of hearing, Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that tax effect on the issue in the present appeals are below ₹ 20 Lacs and in view of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11/07/2018 in F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt), the appeals of the Revenue are not maintainable.

4.

Departmental Representative also agreed with the above submission of the Authorized Representative of the assessee.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the grounds of appeal in all these appeals. From the grounds of appeal of the appeals filed by the Revenue, it is observed that the Revenue is contesting the addition made u/s. 68 of the Act by the Assessing Officer of ₹.5,40,000/-, ₹.5,85,000/- and ₹.6,30,000/- which was deleted by the Ld.CIT(A). Since the additions deleted by the Ld.CIT(A) were all less than ₹.10 Lakhs, we find that the tax effect in all these appeals is less than ₹.20 Lakhs and therefore the appeals of the Revenue are not maintainable on account of low tax effect in view of the above CBDT Circular. Hence these appeals are dismissed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on the 22nd July, 2019.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →