INCOME TAX OFFICER-24(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AKSHAY MITTAL INDUSTRIAL PREMISES CO OP SOC LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4067/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2014-154 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 tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular for filing departmental appeals. The Revenue could not point out any exception to this circular.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) concerning an addition of ₹ 34,65,369/- as income from house property. The tax effect of the appeal was ₹ 10,70,799/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars, when no exceptions apply.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria, DR

AadoSa / O R D E R महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य/ PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

This appeal filed by the Revenue is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)], in appeal No. CIT(A)-36/IT-370/ITO-24(1)(1)/2016-17 dated 27.03.2018. The Assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-24(1)(1), 2 Mumbai (in short ITO/ AO) for the A.Y. 2014-15 vide dated 15.12.2016 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

This appeal contains the quantum addition of ₹ 34,65,369/- as income from house property. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the tax effect in this appeal is ₹ 10,70,799/-, which is below the low tax effect circular brought by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide circular F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt) dated 11.07.2018, wherein monetary limits and other conditions for filing of departmental appeal before the Tribunal has been revised and fixed at ₹ 20 lacs. He placed the copy of this circular on record.

3.

In view of the above, we are of the view that the Revenue’s appeal is fully covered by CBDT circular No. 3 of 2018 and there is no exception brought out by the Revenue that these appeals falls under any of the exception as provided in Para 10 which reads as under: - “10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect:

(a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule IS under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or 3 (c) Where Revenue Audit objection m the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets/ bank accounts.”

4.

When this was confronted to the learned Sr. Departmental Representative, he could not point out that this appeal falls under any of the exception as provided in Circular No. 3 of 2018. Admittedly, the tax effect in this appeal of Revenue is much below the prescribed limit of filing appeal before the Tribunal i.e. ₹ 20 lacs as per CBDT circular No. 3 of 2018. In view of the above, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn in view of Circular No 3 of 2018.

5.

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16.05.2019. (एन. के. प्रधान/ NK PRADHAN) (महावीर ससंह /MAHAVIR SINGH) (लेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (न्याययक सदस्य/ JUDICIAL MEMBER) मुंबई, ददनांक/ Mumbai, Dated:16.05.2019. दीप रकार, व.यनजी धिव / Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →