Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed an appeal challenging an order from the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue concerned the limitation date for issuing a notice and the reliance on a Gujarat High Court decision. The assessee's counsel argued that the tax effect of the appeal was below the monetary limit set by a CBDT circular.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the tax effect of the Revenue's appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024. As no exceptions applied, the Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable and thus deserved to be dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI B R BASKARAN & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the impugned order dated 25/01/2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2014–15.
Vaishali Kedar Ruparel. 2. In its appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds:- “
1. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding the limitation date from issue of notice u/s 148 for AY 2014-15 Ch 30.03.2021 when by notification no.20 dated 31.03.2021, the time limit was extended till 30.06.2021." 2 "Whether on the facts, in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon decision of the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Sumit Jagdishchandra Agarwal vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle-1, Vadodara which is based on decision in the case of Keenara Industries Pvt. Ltd vs ITO (special civil application No. C/SCA/17321/2022 dated 07.02.2023), when SLP has been filed against the decision in the case of Keenara Industries Pvt. Ltd."
3. The appellant prays that the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi on the above grounds be reversed and that of the AO be restored.”
At the outset, the learned A.R., appearing for the assessee, by referring to column 10 of Form No. 36 filed by the Revenue submitted that the tax effect relating to the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue is below the monetary limit of Rs.50 lakh, applicable to appeals before the Tribunal, as per CBDT Circular no.5 of 2024, dated 15/03/2024. Further, he submitted, none of the exceptions as provided in the aforesaid CBDT Circular would apply to Revenue’s appeal. Thus, the learned A.R. submitted that Revenue’s appeal being covered under the aforesaid Circular is not maintainable.
The learned Departmental Representative could not produce any material before us to controvert the submission so made on behalf of the assessee.
Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, we are of the view that the tax effect relating to the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in the present appeal is below the monetary limit of Rs. 50 2 | P a g e
Vaishali Kedar Ruparel. lakh as per CBDT Circular no.5 of 2024, dated 15/03/2024. In view of the aforesaid, Revenue’s appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, the Revenue is granted the liberty to seek recall of this order if, at a later point of time, it is found that the appeal falls under any of the exceptions provided in the Circular referred to above.
In the result, appeal by the Revenue appeal is dismissed. 5. Order pronounced in the open court on 18/06/2024