DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PEARL POLYMERS LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6644/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 August 2016AY 2009-102 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 dismissed the appeal without going into the merits, citing a CBDT circular that sets a monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal. The circular directed the Department not to press appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10,00,000/-.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition made under Section 115JB. The tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 10,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed based on a CBDT circular regarding the monetary limit for appeals to the Tribunal, irrespective of the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115JB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SH. H.S. SIDHU & SH. O.P. KANT

Hearing: 18.08.2016Pronounced: 22.08.2016

ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) dated 23.09.2013 in relation to assessment year 2009-10, raising the following grounds of appeal:

1.

1. On the facts & in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 33,01,445/- made u/s 115JB of the Act ignoring the facts that the addition was made by the Assessing Officer as per the provisions of sub-clause (f) to Explanation-1, of Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. The appellant craves to be allowed to add any fresh grounds of appeal and/or delete or amend any of the ground of appeal.

2. None present on behalf of the Revenue.

3. We have heard learned Authorized Representative and perused the relevant material on record. It is noticed that the CBDT has issued Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015 with retrospective effect, revising the monetary limit to Rs.10,00,000/- for not filing appeals before the Tribunal. Learned Authorized Representative supported the fact that tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-.

3.

From para 10 of the above Circular, it is palpable that the Instruction is applicable to the pending appeals also with retrospective effect and there is a clear-cut direction to the Department to withdraw or not press such appeals filed before the ITAT, wherein tax effect is less than Rs.10,00,000/-. Going by the prescription of the afore-noted Circular, we are of the view that the Revenue should have either not filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal or withdrawn the same as the tax effect in this appeal is admittedly less than the prescribed limit i.e. Rs. 10,00,000/- for not filing the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the instant appeal without going into merits of the case. However, the Department is at liberty to file the Miscellaneous Application, if the tax effect is found to be more than the prescribed limited of Rs. 10 lacs or otherwise.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed. The decision is pronounced in the open court on 22nd August, 2016.

More judgments on Section 115JB

All 5,494 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115JB →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →