What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the CBDT circular and the fact that the tax effect was below the threshold. The Departmental Representative did not dispute these facts.

The Revenue filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order for AYs 2006-07 and 2007-08. The assessee's representative argued that the tax effect was below Rs. 10 lakhs, making the appeals non-maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeals were maintainable given the tax effect below the threshold stipulated by the CBDT circular.

DCIT vs Shabinaa Khan | ITAT Mumbai 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan

Hearing: 7.6.2017Pronounced: 7.6.2017

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 405/Mum/2017

I.T.A. No. 406/Mum/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Both the appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against the order dated 27.10.2016 passed by learned CIT(A)- 54, Mumbai and they relate to A.Ys. 2006-07 & 2007-08.

At the outset, ld. AR of the assessee contended that the tax effect in these appeals of the revenue are below Rs.10 lakhs, therefore, the same are not maintainable as per the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10th December, 2015.

Learned Departmental Representative did not dispute the factual aspect presented by learned AR.

2 Ms. Shabinaa Khan

Having heard the rival submissions and also taking into consideration the Circular of CBDT referred above, we dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue in limine.

In the result, both appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

Order has been pronounced in the Court on 7.6.2017.

DCIT CC 6(2), MUMBAI vs. SHABINAA KHAN, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments