Loading judgment…
Facts
The revenue preferred an appeal against the order dated 06.09.2023, by which the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition made on account of bogus purchases to 5% of the total bogus purchases. The tax-effect in the appeal was ₹.13,69,950/-.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the tax-effect was below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is to be dismissed due to low tax-effect as per CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024.
Sections Cited
CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HONBLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HONBLEShri C.V. Jain Shri Paresh Deshpande
O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (AM)
This appeal by the revenue is preferred against the order dated 06.09.2023 by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to A.Y.2011-12.
(A.Y: 2011-12) Samiullah Mohammed Khalil Ansari 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the revenue is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the addition made on account of bogus purchase to 5% of total bogus purchases.
We find that the tax-effect in the impugned appeal is only ₹.13,69,950/-. Therefore, this appeal has to be dismissed in the light of CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024.
However, liberty is given to the revenue to approach this Tribunal if it finds that this appeal of the revenue is not covered by the aforementioned CBDT Circular. With this, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 09th May, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai / Dated 09.05.2024 Giridhar, Sr.PS
Page No. 2