ITO 22(3)(3), NAVI MUMBAI vs. RAJENDRA B.PATEL, NAVI MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3305/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 August 2018AY 2007-082 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, considering the CBDT circular and the concession from the Departmental Representative, dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not maintainable. The appeal was found to be below the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. During the hearing, it was noted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The assessee's representative did not appear.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect is below the monetary limit specified by CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253,Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal under Section 253 of Income-tax Act is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A), Aurangabad dated 12.03.2014 for Assessment Year 2007-08. This appeal was heard on 25.06.2018. The ld DR for the revenue and Ms. Deepa Khare ld AR for the assessee made their detail submissions, however, before the order could be passed, the CBDT issued a Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July 2018 for fixing the monitory limit for filing appeal before Tribunal. While passing the order we have noted that the tax effect involve in the appeal is below the monetary limit of Rs. 20,00,000/- as prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes(CBDT), vide its Circular No.3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. Therefore, we fixed the present appeal for today, for clarification from the revenue if the appeal is covered by the said circular. The registry was directed to inform the assessee/ ld AR for the assessee. - Shri Rajendra B. Patel

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →