ACIT-10(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. INTER CARAT JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1733/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 August 2018AY 2009-103 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 held that the tax effect of the quantum additions in dispute was below the prescribed limit of Rs. 20 Lacs as per the CBDT circular. Therefore, the revenue's appeals were dismissed without going into the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the relief granted by the CIT(A) to the assessee, where additions on account of bogus purchases were estimated at 12.5%. The assessee argued that the tax effect of these additions was below the threshold limit for appeals as per CBDT Circular No. 03/2018.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeals should be dismissed based on the low tax effect threshold stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 03/2018.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned, but relates to appeal filing criteria based on tax effect.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Bench 1. Aforesaid appeals by revenue for Assessment Years [AY] 2009-10 to 2013-14 contests common order of Ld. first appellate authority qua certain relief provided to the assessee. In the quantum assessment for all these years, the assessee has been saddled with certain additions on account of alleged bogus purchases, the details of which have already been extracted on page number-3 of the impugned order. The Ld. CIT(A)

1.

ITA.Nos.1733-1737/Mum/2018 Inter Carat Jewellery Pvt.Ltd Assessment Years-2009-10 to 2013-14 has estimated the additions against the same @12.5%, against which the revenue is in further appeal before us.

2.

The Ld. Auhtorized Representative for Assessee [AR], Shri Prakash Jotwani, at the outset, pointed out that the tax effect of the quantum additions in each of these AYs as contested by the revenue is less than prescribed threshold limit of Rs.20 Lacs and the same is covered by recently issued low tax effect Circular No.03/2018 dated 11/07/2018 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes [CBDT]. The Ld. DR, Shri.Rajiv K. Gubgotra, has controverted the same by submitting that necessary instructions / certificate, in this regard, would be required from higher authorities.

3.

We have gone through the circular and find that the tax effect of quantum in dispute in each of the AYs is below prescribed limit of Rs.20 Lacs and the assessee stood benefitted by the above circular issued by CBDT wherein the minimum monetary limit for filing the appeals before various appellate authorities have been fixed as under:- S. No. Appeals/ SLPs in Income-tax Monetary Limit (Rs.) matters 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 20.00,000 2 Before High Court 50.00,000 3 Before Supreme Court 1,00.00,000 The aforesaid limits, as per para 13 of the circular applies to pending appeals also. In view of the admitted position, we dismiss the revenue’s appeal for all these AYs.

4.

So far as the contentions raised by Ld. DR is concerned, we find that aforesaid circular does not envisage obtaining of any certificate from

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →