What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the Revenue to withdraw its appeal. This decision was based on a CBDT circular stipulating that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10 lakhs should not be pressed.

The Revenue appealed against an order of the CIT(A) which deleted an addition of Rs. 25,58,625/- made on account of unexplained sundry creditors. The Revenue argued that the assessee failed to provide the address of the sundry creditor, preventing cross-verification.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be withdrawn based on the tax effect and CBDT circular, despite the merits of the addition made by the AO.

ITO vs Sh. Sushil Kumar Daga, New Delhi | ITAT Delhi 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC-2” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA :

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Gar Adv. &, Shri Milind Garg Adv. &

For Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal Sr. DR, Shri Pankaj Gar Adv. &, Shri Milind Garg Adv. &

Hearing: 21/07/2016

Date of hearing : 21/07/2016. Date of order : 28/07/2016. O R D E R

This is revenue’s appeal against the order dated 27.2.2015, passed by the ld. CIT(A)-X, New Delhi, relating to A.Y. 2010-11. 3. Sole ground raised by the revenue in its appeal, is as under: “The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and circumstances of the case in deleting the addition amounting to Rs. 25,58,625/- made on account of unexplained sundry creditors by ignoring the fact that assessee failed to provide the address of the sundry creditor in the absence of the same cross verification is not possible for the AO.”

4. Ld. DR at the outset submitted that, prima facie, the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than Rs. 10 lakhs. Therefore, in terms of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, stipulating that no departmental appeal, involving tax effect below Rs.10 lakhs, shall be filed before the ITAT and further that such instruction would apply retrospectively and the pending appeals below the specified tax limit of Rs.10 lakh may be withdrawn/not pressed, the department may be allowed to withdraw the appeal, provided that it should not be considered as a precedent +in the subsequent years of the acceptance of issues involved in this appeal and, therefore, if in the subsequent year similar issue arises before the ITAT, where the appeal is above the tax limit, as prescribed in the Board’s Circular, the same should be decided on merits.

After considering the submissions of both the parties, the departmental appeal is treated as withdrawn in terms of Board’s Circular, referred to above.

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed having been withdrawn.

Order pronouncement in open court on 28/07/2016.

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SUSHIL KUMAR DAGA, NEW DELHI

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