ACIT, KOTA vs. SHRI MOHAMMAD MIYAN, KOTA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 171/JPR/2012Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 April 2017AY 2005-064 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 appeal as not maintainable. The tax effect, including surcharge, was found to be below the Rs. 10 lakh limit set by the CBDT circular for departmental appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of capital gains by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that even with surcharge, the tax effect was below the prescribed limit for appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the departmental appeal is maintainable when the tax effect is below the threshold stipulated by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 171/JP/2012

Hearing: 21/04/2017Pronounced: 25/04/2017

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 171/JP/2012 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06 cuke Assistant Commissioner Mohammad Miyan, Vs. of Income Tax, Prop.- M/s Masoom Circle-1, Kota. Construction Co., 5-B-18, Vigyan Nagar, Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABYPM 2874 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Shailendra Sharma(Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Aakash Jain (CA) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 21/04/2017 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 25/04/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: KUL BHARAT, J.M.

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated 29/12/2011 passed by the ld. CIT(A), Kota for the A.Y. 2005-06, wherein

the Revenue has taken sole effective ground, which is against deleting the capital gain of Rs. 44,84,675/- assessed in the assessment year 2005-06.

2.

The ld. Sr.DR has drawn our attention towards decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. K.Srinivasan order dated

05/11/1971 regarding surcharge is part of tax.

ITA 171/JP/2012_ 2 ACIT Vs Mohammad Miyan

3.

It is the contention of the ld. AR of the assessee that even if

surcharge is included then also the tax effect is lesser than the prescribed

limit. The ld. Counsel has placed on record the computation of tax, which

reads as under:-

Particulars Amount (In Rs.) Additions i. On account of LTCG 44,84,675/- Total additions 44,84,675/- Tax on total additions @ 20% 8,96,935/- Total tax 8,96,935/- The ld. Counsel has also placed on record the computation of tax after

adding surcharge @ 10%, which reads as under:-

Particulars Amount (In Rs.) Additions i. On account of LTCG 44,84,675/- Total additions 44,84,675/- Tax on total additions @ 20% 8,96,935/- Surcharge @ 10% 89,694/- 9,86,629/- EC & SHEC @ 3% 19,733/- Total tax 10,06,362/- It is observed that the demand/ tax effect in the Revenue’s appeal is less

than Rs. 10 lacs. Under the powers vested by sec. 268A(1) of the I T Act,

CBDT has recently issued Circular No.21 of 2015 dated

10.12.2015(F No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ(Pt) instructing the

authorities below that the departmental appeal should not be

filed before ITAT where the demand/tax effect does not exceed

ITA 171/JP/2012_ 3 ACIT Vs Mohammad Miyan

less than Rs.10 lacs. The circular is specifically mentioned to be applicable

for all pending appeals.

4.

Subject to some exceptions, it is further directed by CBDT that all

the departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax

effect is less than 10 lacs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the

departmental representatives.

5.

The present appeal is not covered by any exceptions mentioned in

the said CBDT circular. Since the tax demand in dispute in this

departmental appeal is below the limit set out by CBDT for the appeal the

same is not maintainable in view of fore goings.

6.

The revenue has not given any other computation, therefore in view

of this computation, we dismiss the appeal of the revenue as not

maintainable as even if the surcharge is included then also the tax effect

remains lesser than the prescribed limit i.e. Rs.9,86,629/-.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25/04/2017. Sd/- Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan½ ¼ dqy Hkkjr ½ (BHAGCHAND) (Kul Bharat) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 25th April, 2017 *Ranjan

ITA 171/JP/2012_ 4 ACIT Vs Mohammad Miyan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The ACIT, Circle-1, Kota. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Shri Mohammad Miyan, Kota. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 171/JP/2012) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 268A(1)

All 190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →