ITO (IT) 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. SURESH ASSANDAS LUDHANI, NAVI MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4803/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 September 2018AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal without going into the merits. This was based on a CBDT circular revising monetary limits for appeals, and the tax effect in this case fell below the revised limit.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which partly allowed the assessee's appeal. The core issue was the assessee's investment of net consideration from a residential property sale for exemption under Section 54F.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) correctly allowed relief to the assessee regarding investment of sale consideration for Section 54F exemption, considering the due date for filing the return and investment in the Capital Gains Account Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54F,Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (DR)
Hearing: 10/09/2018Pronounced: 10/09/2018

O R D E R

PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM

1.

1. This appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order dated 12.04.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short ‘the CIT (A)’)-57, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2011-12, whereby the Ld. CIT (A) has partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against assessment order passed u/s 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).

2.

Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT (Appeals), the revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal on the following effective grounds:-

1.

“Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) is correct in allowing relief to the assessee as the assessee did not invest the net consideration on sale of residential property u/s 54F into a new residential house before due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2 Assessment Year: 2011-12

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) is correct in allowing relief to the assessee as the assessee has not invested the net consideration in specified Capital Gain Account Scheme u/s 54(F)(4) before due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

3.

The CBDT, vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, has revised the monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal with retrospective effect. The tax effect in the aforesaid appeal is below the monetary limit of `20 lakhs specified in the CBDT Circular aforesaid.

4.

In this background, the Ld. D.R. appearing for the Revenue was required to state his position, however, he has not referred to any material which would show that the captioned appeal is protected by any of the exceptions provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular (supra).

5.

Without going into the merit of the issue raised, the captioned appeal is deemed to be withdrawn/not pressed as its filing is not in consonance with the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra). Before parting we may clarify that if on a later date, the Revenue finds that filing of the appeal is protected by the exceptions provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular (supra), it shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recall of the order and reinstitution of the appeal for adjudication on merits. The Tribunal shall consider such application, if any, as per the extant law.

6.

In conclusion, by applying the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra), the captioned appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn/ not pressed.

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →