DCIT 1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. COCK BRAND SINNAR BIDIS P. LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2330/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 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 noted that the tax effect was below the revised monetary limit for appeals. Since no exceptions were cited, the appeal was deemed not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The tax effect in dispute was below the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable in light of the revised monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, L Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sharma
For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Waglay
Hearing: 03.08.2018Pronounced: 03.08.2018

The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-2, Mumbai dated 08.12.2016 which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") dated 16.02.2015.

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Without going into the merit of the issue raised, the captioned appeal is deemed to be withdrawn/not pressed as it’s filing is not in consonance with the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra).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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →