DCIT 13(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. REMSONS INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3840/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 January 2018AY 2009-103 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 held that as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, appeals with a tax effect of Rs. 10 lacs or less should not be filed or should be withdrawn. This circular is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of disallowance for provision of bad and doubtful debts by the CIT(A). The disputed amount was ₹18,41,678, resulting in a net tax effect below Rs. 10 lacs.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the low tax effect, in light of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Respondent: DR Assessee by :

This appeal of Revenue is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Mumbai, [in short CIT(A)] in appeal No. CIT(A)-21/ITO-13(3)(1)/IT-257/2014-15 dated 23/03/2016. The Assessment was framed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 9(3), Mumbai (in short ACIT) for the assessment year 2009-10 vide order dated 29-09-2014 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of provision for bad and doubtful debts. For this Revenue has raised following ground No.1: -

“1. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions of ₹ 18,41,678/- on account of provisions for bad & doubtful debts.”

3.

At the outset, it is noticed that the quantum involved is ₹ 18,41,678/-. Hence, net tax effect in this appeal of revenue on the disputed addition made by AO and deleted by CIT (A), is less than Rs. 10 lacs.

4.

During the course of hearing before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee, pointed out that in this case, the net tax demand in this appeal is below Rs.10.00 lacs. The learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in view of the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 brought out by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the appeal was not maintainable and be dismissed. The learned Sr. DR also agreed to the facts stated by the learned Counsel for the assessee but could not point out whether this case falls under any of the exception provided in the Circular. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find from the records before us that the tax involved in the disputed issue is below Rs.10 lacs and therefore, in view of the circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 no appeal should be filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal which has tax effect of Rs. 10.00 lacs or less and this circular is also applicable retrospectively to all pending appeals. The relevant extract the said CBDT Circular (Supra) is as under: -

“This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”

6.

Considering the above, the appeal filed by the Revenue, is therefore, dismissed

7.

In the result, the appeal Revenue is dismissed

Order pronounced in the open court on 24-01-2018.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →