DCIT (IT) 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. OVERSEAS CHINESE BANKING CORPORATION LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5193/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 September 2018AY 2007-082 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 dismissed the Revenue's appeal. Both the assessee's representative and the Departmental Representative agreed that the appeal was not maintainable due to low tax effect.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order from the CIT(A) regarding the taxation of interest income. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below ₹20 Lacs, making the appeal not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal was maintainable given the low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not specified

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON’BLE & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Satish Kumar Dinavasi
For Respondent: Shri N. Padmanaban, Shri Satish Kumar Dinavasi
Hearing: 10.09.2018Pronounced: 10.09.2018

O R D E R

PER C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-57, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT(A)-57/Arr. 68/2016-17 dated 27.05.2016 for the Assessment Year 2007-08.

1.

2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds in its appeal: - “1. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in taxing the interest income @15% as per

(A.Y:2007-08) M/s. Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd., provisions of Article 11(2)(b) instead of Article 11(2)(a) of the India- Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement.

2.

The Appellant prays that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the above ground be set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.”

3.

At the time of hearing, Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that tax effect on the issue in the present appeal is below ₹ 20 Lacs and in view of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11/07/2018 in F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt), the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable.

4.

Departmental Representative also agreed with the above submission of the Authorized Representative of the assessee. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal of the Revenue on account of low tax effect.

5.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order Pronounced in the Court at the close of the hearing on Monday, the 10th day of September, 2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →