Loading judgment…
Facts
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Department) filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order dated 11.07.2024, which deleted an addition of Rs. 1,73,13,000/- made by the Assessing Officer for Employee Insurance Policy Premium for A.Y. 2018-19. The Department argued that these insurance expenses were personal in nature and sought to set aside the CIT(A)'s order to confirm the AO's addition.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Departmental Representative (DR) submitted that the appeal had become infructuous due to Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024, which increased the monetary limit for filing appeals before the ITAT to Rs. 60 lacs. Since the tax effect in this appeal was Rs. 59,91,683/-, falling below the revised limit, both the DR and the assessee's representative agreed that the appeal was not maintainable. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the department's appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the department's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition was maintainable before the ITAT, given that the tax effect of Rs. 59,91,683/- was below the revised monetary limit of Rs. 60 lacs for filing appeals.
Sections Cited
Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI. NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT & SHRI. RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN
O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.): 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/assessee against the order dated 11.07.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Page | 1 Aditya Birla Housing Finance Limited; A.Y. 2018-19 Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] for the A.Y. 2018-19.
The assessee is in appeal before us and has raised following grounds of appeal:
1. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,73,13,000/- on account of Employee Insurance Policy Premium made by AO, Ignoring the fact that Insurance Expenses on account of employees are personal in nature."
2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the grounds be set aside and confirm the order of the AO.”
During the arguments, the Ld. DR very fairly submitted that the department appeal has become infructuous by virtue of circular no. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024, wherein the monetary limit for tax effect for filing appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has been raised upto Rs. 60 lacs. It is submitted that the tax effect in this appeal is below 60 lacs and as such the appeal has become infructuous and same may be disposed off accordingly.
Aditya Birla Housing Finance Limited; A.Y. 2018-19 4. We have also heard the Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee, who has supported the submissions of the Ld. DR, and stated that since the appeal is not maintainable and has become infructuous.
We have considered the submissions and examined the record. In view of the enhancement of the monetary limit for filing the departmental appeal wherein the tax effect for filing the appeal should be Rs. 60 Lacs or above and the tax effect in this appeal has been shown to be Rs. 59,91,683/-; in view of these facts and the submissions made by the Ld. DR, the appeal filed by the department is accordingly dismissed having become infructuous.
In the result, appeal filed by the department is accordingly dismissed having become infructuous.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11.10.2024