INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, AGARTALA, AGARTALA vs. BIDHAN ROY, AGARTALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 158/GTY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 March 2025Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as non-maintainable due to the tax effect being below ₹60,00,000/-, as stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024. The assessee's cross-objections were also dismissed. The Revenue was granted liberty to file a Miscellaneous Application for recall if the tax effect is later found to be above the limit or falls under exceptions.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which deleted an addition of Rs. 1,62,65,822/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits for AY 2013-14. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) accepted additional evidence without giving the AO an opportunity. The assessee filed cross-objections supporting the CIT(A)'s deletion.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144,Section 69A,Section 46A,Section 34(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

order

: March 25th, 2025 ORDER

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2013-14 dated 20.05.2024,

4.

On due consideration of the above facts and circumstances, we dismiss this appeal of the Revenue on account of low tax effect. However, in case on re-verification of the facts at the end of the Ld. Assessing Officer, it emerges that the tax effect is more than the limit for filing the appeal or this case falls under any of the exceptions provided in the instruction, then the Revenue will be at liberty to file a Miscellaneous Application for recall of this order and revival of the appeal. Such an application should be filed within the time limit provided in the Act.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue as well as the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →