ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. SUDHA NAGAR, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5837/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 August 2017AY 2005-063 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 appeal filed by the Revenue. This was based on the fact that the tax effect of the disputed issue was below Rs 10 lakhs, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) that deleted an addition of Rs 30,00,000/- made by the AO on account of income from an undisclosed source. The CIT(A) had accepted the assessee's explanation for the funds.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal was maintainable given the low tax effect, in light of CBDT instructions regarding monetary limits for appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153(C)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “D” BENCH NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA

For Appellant: Shri Aakash Chugh, CA
For Respondent: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT DR, Shri Aakash Chugh, CA
Hearing: 01/08/2017Pronounced: 01/08/2017

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.5837/Del/2015
ITA No. 5837/Del/2014

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

ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the revenue against impugned order dated 3.8.2015, passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-3, New Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 153(C) for the A.Y. 2004-05. In the grounds of appeal the assessee has raised following grounds:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order passed by the learned CIT (A) is erroneous and the learned CIT (A) has erred: i) In deleting the addition of Rs 30,00,000/- made by AO on account of income from undisclosed source Page 1 of 3 ii) In accepting unsubstantial explanation that Rs.30.00 lakhs was being sent for purchase of property lacking the details of asset/property or whether it was ultimately purchased for the business purpose for which it was being acquired. iii) In examining the reasons for difference of explanation given before AO and CIT (A).

2. The appellant craves, leave or reserving the right to amend modify alter, add or forego any grounds of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.”

2. At the outset, it was noticed that the tax effect on the disputed issue is less than Rs. 10 lakhs. The ld. CIT DR fairly admitted that the tax effect is below Rs. 10 lakhs and therefore, as per the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 wherein it has been instructed that the revenue should not prefer any appeal before the Tribunal having tax effect is less than of Rs. 10 lakhs.

3. In view of the aforesaid fact that the tax effect on the disputed amount in the appeal filed by the revenue is below of Rs. 10 lakhs, therefore, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in-limine on the grounds of non-maintainability as per the instruction of CBDT circular (supra). It has been further clarified by the same circular that the said instructions for not filing of appeals below the prescribed monetary will apply on all the pending appeals.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 01.08.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →