INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. HITESH MANGILAL JAIN, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 258/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 October 2024Bench: SHRI BR BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (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 observed that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, the appeal of the Revenue Department was liable to be dismissed. However, liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek recalling of the order if any contrary circumstance or judgment was found.

What were the facts?

The Revenue preferred an appeal against the order dated 22.11.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2014-15. The tax effect in this case was found to be less than the prescribed limit of Rs. 60,00,000/- as per the latest CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed based on the tax effect being below the prescribed limit and peculiar facts of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI BR BASKARAN & SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Appellant: Ms. Ridhisha Jain (Virtually Present)
For Respondent: Shri G. Santosh Kumar, SR. AR
Hearing: 17.10.2024Pronounced: 30.10.2024

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 22.11.2023, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2014-15.

2.

At the outset, we observe that in this case the tax effect is less than Rs. 60,00,000/- the prescribed limit set out as per latest CBDT circular no. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024.

3.

Thus, considering the peculiar fact and circumstances of the case, the appeal of the Revenue Department is liable to be dismissed, however, with liberty to the Revenue Department to seek recalling of this order, on finding the circumstance or judgment contrary if any.

4.

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed with liberty as mentioned in para no. 3.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.10.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →