ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. DEEPAK SHARMA, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2325/DEL/2012Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 March 2017AY 2006-073 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 disputed addition was less than the prescribed monetary limit for filing an appeal before the Tribunal. Following CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as non-maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 26,35,395/- and a disallowance of Rs. 69,343/-. Both parties agreed that the tax effect on the disputed addition was below the monetary limit for filing an appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal was maintainable before the Tribunal given that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI

Before: SRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI O.P. KANT

PER AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order dt. 07.03.2012 passed by the Ld.CIT(A)-III, New Delhi, for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 143(3)/153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2006-07.

2.

The Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal. “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.26,35,395/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of deemed income u/s 2(24)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs.69,343/- made by the A.O. on account of interest claimed on house property under the head income from house property.

ITA 2325/Del/2012 AY 2006-07 Sh. Deepak Sharma 3. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 4.The appellant craves to add, amend, modify, or alter any grounds of appeal at the time or before the hearing of the appeal.”

3. At the outset it was noticed that the tax effect on the disputed issue of Rs.26,35,395/- is less than the prescribed monetary limit of filing of appeal before the Tribunal, which is Rs.10 lakhs. Both the parties agreed that the tax effect on the disputed addition is less than Rs.10 lakhs.

4.

After considering the aforesaid fact and the CBDT Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December,2015, F.No. 279/Misc./142/2007-ITJ(Pt.) read with S.268 A of the Income Tax Act 1961, whereby the monetary limit of filing of appeal has been raised to Rs.10,00,000/- and has been made applicable for all the pending appeals, we are of the opinion that this appeal by the Revenue is dismissed as non-maintainable. 5. In the result the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 2nd March, 2017.

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →