DCIT CIR 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT TRUST LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5628/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 October 2017AY 2008-092 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 the tax effect of the disputed amount was Rs. 8,19,788/-, which was below the prescribed limit of Rs. 10 lakhs as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. Therefore, the Revenue was barred from filing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A) concerning the assessment year 2008-09. The quantum of disputed income was Rs. 23,58,665/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals.

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, “I” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai, DR

This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47 Mumbai, [in short CIT(A)] in appeal No. CIT(A)-IT-929/13-14/118-15-16 dated 14-09-2015. The Assessment was framed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 2(2), Mumbai (in short DCIT or AO ) for the A.Y. 2008-09 vide order dated 31-01-2014 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, the learned Sr. DR fairly stated the position that the quantum under dispute in this appeal of Revenue is only amounting to Rs. 23,58,665/- and, the tax effect on the same is Rs. 8,19,788 as reported by the AO. In such situation, the tax effect is below the prescribed limit i.e. less than 10 lakhs, as notified by CBDT Circular

Industrial Investment Trust Ltd. (AY 08-09) 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 learned DR stated that tax effect involved wherein the disputed tax amount is Rs. 8,19,788/-, which is below Rs 10 lakhs. As the tax effect is below the prescribed limit, revenue is barred from filing of this appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed as unadmitted.

3.

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed as unadmitted.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →