ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRI V. KRISHNAMURTHY, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3064/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 February 2018AY 2008-094 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 condoned the delay in filing the appeals in the interest of justice. However, it dismissed the appeals as not maintainable based on CBDT circulars regarding monetary limits for appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals with a significant delay, citing a misunderstanding of tax effect thresholds. The appeals challenged the deletion of additions made towards disallowance of agricultural income claimed by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeals are maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect and CBDT circulars on monetary limits. Whether the disallowance of agricultural income by estimation without a scientific basis was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY

Pronounced: 12.02.2018

आदेश / O R D E R

Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:-

1.

These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the common order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Chennai dated 30.10.2014 in 11,201/11-12 &71/13-14 for the assessment years 2008-09 & 2009-10 passed U/s. 250(6) r.w.s 143(3) of the Act.

2.

There is a delay of 605 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue. The Ld.ACIT has furnished an affidavit before us stating that the delay had occurred due to the wrong impression that tax effect for the assessment years 2008-09 & 2009-10 was below the threshold limit for filing appeals. However subsequently it was pointed out by the senior authorized representative of the Department vide his letter dated 10.10.2016, that it was an erroneous understanding of the instruction stated in the circular. Hence on realizing the error, the Revenue had filed the appeals for the assessment year 2008-09 & 2009-10. It was therefore pleaded that the delay in filing the appeals may be condoned. The Ld.AR objected to the submission of the Ld.DR. After hearing both sides we do not find much strength in the condonation petition filed by the Revenue. However in the interest of justice we are of the considered view that the delay in filing the appeals requires to be condoned. Accordingly we hereby condone the delay of 605 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue and proceed to hear the case on merits.

3.

The Revenue has raised three identical grounds in its appeals, however the crux of the issue is that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the Ld.AO amounting to Rs.10,37,140/- & Rs.12,83,490/- for the assessment years 2008- 09 & 2009-10 towards disallowance of 15% of agricultural income claimed by the assessee.

4.

At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted before us that the above mentioned appeals are not maintainable due to the Circular No.21/2013 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the CBDT with respect to monetary limit. Hence, it was pleaded that the appeals of the Revenue may be dismissed. The Ld. DR could not controvert to the submission of the Ld.AR.

5.

After hearing both sides we find merit in the submission of the Ld.AR. The CBDT vide its circular cited supra has directed the Revenue not to file appeal before the Tribunal where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.10 lakhs. In the above mentioned appeals of the assessee the tax effect is less than Rs.10 lakhs.

Further it is evident that the Ld.AO had disallowed the claim of agricultural income by estimation without any scientific basis for both the assessment years. The process of estimation without any scientific basis cannot be treated as identical facts/issue for the purpose of the circular issued by the CBDT. Further the fact that for both the assessment years the tax effect is less than Rs.10 lakhs is not in dispute by the Revenue. Therefore, we are of the view that the circular cited by the Ld.AR is applicable to the case of the assessee for both the assessment years. Hence in accordance with the instructions issued by the CBDT vide its Circular mentioned herein above, we hereby dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue as not maintainable.

6.

In the result the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed in limine.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 12th February, 2018 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →