ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 17(2), CHENNAI vs. M.L.MANGESH, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1688/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 December 2017AY 2007-082 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 Revenue authorities were precluded from filing the appeal as the tax effect was less than the monetary limit set by the CBDT. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as un-admitted.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee's counsel submitted that the tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy

Hearing: 05.12.2017Pronounced: 27.12.2017

O R D E R

PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 5, Chennai dated 09.05.2017 relevant to the assessment year 2005-06 [wrongly typed as 2007-08]. In Form No. 36 under Col. 3 – “Assessment Year”, it is mentioned as 2007-08, whereas, in the assessment order dated 08.03.2013, Form No. 35 filed before the ld. CIT(A) as well as in the appellate order, the assessment year is mentioned as 2005-06.

2.

At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the tax effect in the appeal filed by the Revenue is less than the monetary limit of ₹.10,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT to file an appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal as per the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015. The ld. DR fairly conceded the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. Being so, the Revenue authorities are precluded from filing the appeal before the Tribunal, since the tax effect is less than ₹.10,00,000/- in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as un-admitted.

3.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on the 27th December, 2017 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →