DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S.ALTIUS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5879/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 August 2018AY 2012-132 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The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn/not pressed, as its filing was not in consonance with the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order related to penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The tax effect in dispute was below the revised monetary limit for appeals set by a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable in light of the revised monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, L Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan SinghShri Himanshu Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sharma
For Respondent: Ms. Dinkle Hariya
Hearing: 10.08.2018Pronounced: 10.08.2018

The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-16, Mumbai dated 20.06.2017 which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 28.09.2015.

2.

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 dispute in the captioned appeal is stated to be below the monetary limit of `20 lakhs specified in the CBDT Circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra).

3.

In this background, the learned D.R. appearing for the Revenue was required to state his position; 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).

M/s. Altius Enterprises P. Ltd.

4.

Without going into the merit of the issue raised, the captioned appeal is deemed to be withdrawn/not pressed as it’s filing is not in consonance with the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra).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.

5.

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 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →