What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect of the additions in dispute was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed.

The Revenue filed appeals against the relief granted to the assessee by the first appellate authority for assessment years 2012-13 to 2014-15. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeals are maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circular.

DCIT vs Rajendra P. Jain | ITAT Mumbai 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

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

Heard together (3 matters)

I.T.A. No.1384/Mum/2018

I.T.A. No.1385/Mum/2018

I.T.A. No.1386/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 Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeals by revenue for Assessment Years [AY] 2012-13 to 2014-15 contests common order of Ld. first appellate authority qua certain relief provided to the assessee. None has appeared for assessee. Therefore, left with no option, we proceed to dispose-off the same on the basis of material available on record and after hearing Ld. Departmental Representative [DR], Shri Rajeev K.Gubgotra. 2. At the outset, it has been noticed that the tax effect of the quantum additions in each of these AYs as contested by the revenue is less than prescribed 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), MUMBAI vs. RAJENDRA P. JAIN, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments