DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CR BUILDING, DELHI vs. JETSAVE INDIA TOURS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3249/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 November 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dismissed the Revenue's appeal. It found that the tax effect in the case was below Rs. 60 lacs, which is the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2024 dated 17/09/2024 for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) order for Assessment Year 2017-18, which allowed credit for cash deposits totaling Rs. 2,71,14,409/-. The Revenue contended that the assessee failed to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor, thus not discharging their onus.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is admissible before the ITAT given that the tax effect is below the monetary limit stipulated by the CBDT Circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR, Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv
Hearing: 05.11.2024Pronounced: 08.11.2024

ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M.

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi-4, New Delhi-110002, pertains to Assessment Year 2017-18, on the following grounds of appeal:

“1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the credit of average of previous 2 years cash deposits without considering the fact that the assessee has failed to discharge the onus to Page 1 of 3

ITA No.-3249/Del/2024 Jetsave India Tours Pvt. Ltd. provide the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor with regard to entire amount of cash deposit of Rs. 2,71,14,409/- 2. The appellant craves to add, alter or amend any / all of the ground of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.

2.

At the outset, it is noted that tax effect in this case is below the limit fixed by the CBDT for filing appeal before the ITAT. The grievance of the Revenue shows that the tax effect would be less than Rs. 60 lacs, therefore, the present appeal filed by the Revenue is not admissible in the light of the CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2024 dated 17/09/2024. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

3.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 08.11.2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →