ACIT 26(1), MUMBAI vs. BALASAHEB SHANKAR TUPE, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3076/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 August 2018AY 2012-134 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 in all appeals was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and the issues did not fall under any exceptions. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) granting relief to assessees. The quantum of dispute in each appeal was less than Rs. 20.00 lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeals should be dismissed in limine due to low tax effect as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, when the disputed issues do not fall under any exceptions.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (4 matters)

I.T.A. No.3045/Mum/2017
I.T.A. No.3200/Mum/2017
I.T.A. No.3318/Mum/2017
I.T.A. No.3667/Mum/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER BENCH: The revenue has filed these appeals challenging the orders passed by Ld CIT(A) in the respective hands of the assessees and they relate to the assessment years mentioned in the caption against the name of each of the assessees. In all these appeals, the revenue is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in granting relief to the respective asessees.

2.

We heard the parties. We noticed that the quantum in dispute involved in these appeals is as given below and hence the tax effect involved therein is less than Rs.20.00 lakhs.

1.

Sr.No Name of Assessee Quantum in Dispute 1 M/s. Yasham Bio Science Pvt. 34,39,000/- Ltd 2 Balasaheb Shankar Tupe 52,06,175/- 3 M/s. International Film 62,43,685/- Distributors India Private Limited 4 Venilaxmi Import & Export 55,15,000/- Pvt. Ltd. 5 Virendra Jain 49,63,592/- The CBDT has issued a new Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 in supersession of its earlier Circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015. According to the Circular No.3/2018, the revenue is precluded from pursuing its appeal if the tax effect is Rs.20.00 lakhs or less. Apparently the issue in dispute does not fall in any of the exceptions provided in paragraph 10 of the Circular No.3/2018, referred above. The Ld D.R, however, sought time to get a certificate from the PCIT/CIT concerned that the grounds urged in this appeal does not fall under any of the exceptions specified in the said circular. However, from the available material, he could not point out that the issue contested in this appeal fall in any of the exceptions.

3.

We have noticed that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.20.00 lakhs and the issue contested herein also apparently does not fall in any of the exceptions specified in the Circular. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal of the revenue in limine. However, the revenue is given liberty to move miscellaneous application seeking recall of this order, if it is found that the issue contested in this appeal falls in any of the exception provided in paragraph 10 of the Circular.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →