DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. FABTECH TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3991/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 December 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (Judicial Member)1 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 of the appeal was below the monetary limit stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024. Since none of the exceptions applied and the Departmental Representative could not controvert the assessee's submission, the appeal was deemed not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order passed by the learned CIT(A) for the assessment year 2012-13. The grounds raised by the Revenue pertained to the addition of Rs. 26,20,546/- as bogus purchases.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGHSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Appellant: Shri Tejas Shah
For Respondent: Shri Dinesh A Chourasia, Sr.DR

Date of Hearing – 04/12/2024 Date of Order – 06/12/2024

O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M.

The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 09/05/2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2012–13. 2. In its appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds: - “

1. The Ld AO is erred in adding a sum of Rs. 26, 20,546/- as bogus purchases without considering the details which the appellant company had submitted at the time of assessment proceeding.

2. The Appellant prays to delete the addition made on this account.”

3. At the outset, the learned A.R., appearing for the assessee, by referring to column 10 of Form No. 36 filed by the Revenue submitted that the tax effect relating to the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue is below the monetary limit of Rs.60 lakh, applicable to appeals before the Tribunal, as per CBDT Circular no.9 of 2024, dated 17/09/2024. Further, he submitted that none of the exceptions as provided in the aforesaid CBDT Circular would apply to Revenue’s appeal. Thus, the learned A.R. submitted that Revenue’s appeal being covered under the aforesaid Circular is not maintainable.

4.

The learned Departmental Representative could not produce any material before us to controvert the submission so made on behalf of the assessee.

5.

Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, we are of the view that the tax effect relating to the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue in the present appeal is below the monetary limit of Rs. 60 lakh as per CBDT Circular no.9 of 2024, dated 17/09/2024. In view of the aforesaid, Revenue’s appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, the Revenue is granted the liberty to seek recall of this order if, at a later point in time, it is found that the appeal falls under any of the exceptions provided in the Circular referred to above.

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed. 6. Order pronounced in the open Court on 06/12/2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →