ITO4(3), MUMBAI vs. DHIRAJ L SHAH, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1943/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2019AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the threshold limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. The Revenue's representative agreed that the appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the deletion of an addition by the CIT(A). The tax effect of the relief granted by the CIT(A) was below Rs. 20 lacs.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the ITAT due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM Shri Dhiraj L. Shah

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi
For Respondent: Shri S. K. Mitra (Sr. AR), Shri Nishit Gandhi
Hearing: 08/05/2019Pronounced: 08/05/2019

Revenue by Shri S. K. Mitra (Sr. AR) Assessee by Shri Nishit Gandhi Date of Hearing 08/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement 08/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH (J.M):

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-09, Mumbai, dated 09.01.2018, pertaining to the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

The Revenue is in appeal against the deletion of addition by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

3.

At the very outset, it transpires that the tax effect of the relief granted by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is below Rs.20 lacs, as per the limit fixed by the CBDT for filing the appeal before the ITAT vide CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated, F. No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt) dated 11th July, 2018 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →