ITO 12(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. CRIMSON INTERACTIVE PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5088/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 August 2018AY 2008-093 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 as not maintainable, citing CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 which revised monetary limits for filing appeals. The assessee's Cross Objection was dismissed as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2008-09. The assessee's representative stated that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 20.00 lacs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect is below the revised monetary limits specified by CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM

For Appellant: Mr. Jitendra Jain, Advocate, Shri Nishant Samaiya, D.R
For Respondent: Shri Nishant Samaiya, D.R

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 5088/Mum/2016
C.O. No. 220/Mum/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R

PER RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue pertaining to assessment year 2008-09 is directed against the order passed by CIT(A)-20, Mumbai, dated 27.05.2016, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’), dated 13.03.2015.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘A.R’) for the assessee submitted that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.20.00 lacs. In support of his aforesaid contention the Ld. A.R had placed on record a calculation of the ‘tax liability’ involved in the appeal. The ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘D.R’) did not controvert the said factual position.

3.

We find that the CBDT vide its Circular No.03/2018, dated 11/07/2018 has revised the monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal, retrospectively. Since the tax effect in dispute in the captioned appeal is admittedly below the monetary limit of Rs.20.00 lacs specified in the CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11/07/2018, therefore, the same is dismissed as not maintainable.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

C.O. No. 220/Mum/2018 (Arising out of

5.

The ld. A.R submitted that the Cross Objection filed by the assessee was not being pressed. In the backdrop of the aforesaid concession of the ld. A.R the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as not pressed.

P a g e | And C.O. No. 220/Mum/2018 AY. 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-12(1)(4) Vs. M/s Crimson Interactive Pvt. Ltd. 6. That both the appeal filed by the revenue and the Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →