ITO 17(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. J. N. MARSHALL & CO. (STEEL DEPT.), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4993/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 July 2018AY 2007-083 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 Revenue's appeal, stating that the tax effect of the penalty deletion was below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals as per CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The cross-objection was also dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty amount was Rs. 13.75 Lacs, which was below the Rs. 20 Lacs limit prescribed by a CBDT circular for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable considering the low tax effect of the deleted penalty as per CBDT circular. Whether the CBDT circular applies to pending appeals.

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, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

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

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA.No.4993/Mum/2016
CO.No.216/Mum/2018

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

ITA.No.4993/Mum/2016 &CO.No.216/Mum/2018 J.N. Marshall & Co.(Steel Dept.) Assessment Year-2007-08 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1. The captioned appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [AY] 2007- 08 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-28 [CIT(A)], Mumbai, Appeal No. CIT(A)-28/IT-204/ITO-12(1)(4)/2014-15 dated 19/05/2016 qua deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Rs.13.75 Lacs as levied by Ld. AO vide order dated 29/05/2014. The assessee is in cross-objection against the same.

2.

At the outset, Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee drew our attention to the fact that the quantum of penalty 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, Ms. Pooja Swaroop, 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 is below prescribed limit of Rs.20 Lacs and the assessee stood benefitted by the above circular issued by CBDT wherein the minimum monetary limit for filing the appeals before various appellate authorities have been fixed as under:-

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 →