DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ADIDAS TECHNICAL SERVICES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1675/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 October 2018AY 2010-114 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Revenue's appeal had a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit and that the Senior Departmental Representative did not press the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an assessment order directing the exclusion of two companies from a list of comparables. The assessee argued that no adjustment to income would result from this exclusion. The Revenue's counsel later stated that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect and CBDT circular instructions regarding pending appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “I-1” : DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI L.P. SAHU

Hearing: 26.09.2018Pronounced: 01.10.2018

PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Revenue has been directed against the assessment order dated 27.01.2015 passed by DCIT, Circle-1(2), New Delhi, under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the I.T. Act, 1961, pursuant to the Order of the Disputes

1.

2 ITA.No.1675/Del./2015 M/s. Adidas Technical Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Resolution Panel-1, New Delhi, Dated 27.11.2014 on the following ground :

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.DRP has erred in directing to exclude Crystal Hues and Quadrant Communications Ltd. from the list of comparables.”

2.

Learned Counsel for the Assessee filed a chart explaining therein the margin of assessee as per T.P. Order giving effect to DRP direction and without prejudice to the merits of submission against inclusion of two comparables, as prayed for in the departmental appeal, as the same have been directed by Ld. DRP to be excluded for valid reasons set-out in detail in the Order, assessee submitted that no adjustment would result to return of income. Therefore, the departmental appeal is liable to be dismissed for monetary limit being lower than the prescribed by CBDT Vide Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018. Copy of the same is provided to the Ld. D.R. The Ld. D.R. submitted that tax effect in the departmental appeal

3 ITA.No.1675/Del./2015 M/s. Adidas Technical Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. is below Rs.20 lakhs. It is also directed that this instruction will apply retrospectively to the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in the Tribunal. Pending appeals below the specified tax effect may be withdrawn/not pressed. Learned Sr. D.R. in view of the above Board Circular did not press the above Departmental Appeal. We may also note that the Appeal of the Department above would not fall within the exceptions provided in the Board Circular. In the result, the Departmental Appeal is not maintainable as have been filed against the instruction of the Board. The Departmental Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn/ not pressed by the Learned Sr. D.R.

3.

In the result, Departmental Appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

Sd/- Sd/- (L.P. SAHU) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Delhi, Dated 01st October, 2018 VBP/-

4 ITA.No.1675/Del./2015 M/s. Adidas Technical Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

More judgments on Section 144C

All 3,699 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →