DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. SH. MAKHAN SINGLA, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3859/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 September 2016AY 2010-113 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 appeal was not maintainable as it was filed in violation of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which sets a pecuniary limit for appeals to the ITAT. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(Appeals)'s order deleting an addition made by the AO regarding unexplained investment in jewellery. The appeal was filed by the Revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the ITAT given the prescribed pecuniary limits set by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NEW DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV & SHRI L.P. SAHU

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 22.09.2016Pronounced: 23.09.2016

Date of hearing : 22.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2016 O R D E R

Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member

1.

This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of CIT(Appeals)(Central), Gurgaon dated 21.03.2013 inter alia on the following grounds:-

“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition of Rs.24,62,155/- made by the AO on account of unexplained source of investment in jewellery by ignoring the fact that at the time of assessment, the assessee has to explain the source of whole jewellery whether it is seized or not.

(ii) That the appellant craves to add, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”

2. Undisputedly, the present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue in violation of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, wherein the pecuniary limit for preferring the appeal by the Revenue before the ITAT has been prescribed beyond Rs.10 lakhs. The above circular on pecuniary limit has now statutory force within the provisions of section 268A of the IT Act, hence, the present appeal is not maintainable.

3.

The ld. DR requested that while dismissing the appeal as not maintainable, it may be made clear that the present order will have no precedential value.

4.

In view of the above discussion, the present appeal preferred by the Revenue in violation of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 (supra) is not maintainable and hence, the same is dismissed as such, making it clear that since the present appeal has not been disposed of on merits of the appeal, but due to above reason, it will have no any judicial precedence.

5.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

Pronounced in the open court on this 23rd day of September 2016.

More judgments on Section 268A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →