ITO 27(2)(5), NAVI MUMBAI vs. PARASMAL C. BAMBOLI, MUMBAI

The revenue has challenged the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on the following effective grounds:-

“On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in granting exemption u/s 54 by ignoring the section 54 of the Act, wherein as per the section, there is failure on part of the assessee to purchase the flat within the time period as provided in the section in this case.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred granting exemption u/s 54 by treating the receipt of allotment letter by the assessee from the builder equivalent to the purchase of property, which is not correct.

At the outset, it transpired that in the aforesaid case, 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, 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.

We have gone through the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the grounds of appeals. We find that the tax effect in the above referred appeal is less than Rs. 20 lacs.

The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) fairly conceded that this appeal is not maintainable in light of the above said CBDT Circular. The Ld. DR also did not point out that this appeal falls in any of the exceptions carved out in the above said circular. Accordingly, we dismiss the aforesaid appeal filed by the Revenue as not maintainable.