ACIT 18(1), MUMBAI vs. MAYURI HIRALAL KOTHARI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8292/MUM/2010Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 February 2017AY 2006-072 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 revenue's appeal as not maintainable due to the low tax effect, following a CBDT circular. The assessee's cross-objection was also dismissed as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order classifying an amount as short-term capital gain, arguing it was business income. Both parties agreed the tax effect was below the threshold for appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect. Whether the income was short-term capital gain or business income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Sagar
For Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar (DR), Shri Pradeep Sagar

Heard together (2 matters)

C.O. No. 58/Mum/2012
I.T.A. No.8292 /Mum/2010

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

Date of hearing : 28-02-2017 Date of pronouncement : 28-02-2017 O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja, AM :- This appeal filed by the revenue and the crosss objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-

C.O. No. 58/Mum/2012 29, Mumbai [hereinafter called CIT(A)] dated 30-09-2010 passed against the order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 19/12/2008 for AY. 2006-07. 2. The revenue raised the following grounds of appeal:-

“The order of the CIT(A) is opposed to law and facts of 1) the case. ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in holding that the amount of Rs. 12,19,3561- is Short Term Capital Gain of the Assessee without appreciating the fact that the nature of the activities of the assessee during the relevant previous year is trading in shares and therefore, the income arising to her was business income.”

2.

During the course of hearing it was jointly stated by both the parties that tax effect involved in the appeal filed by the revenue is less than Rs.10 lakhs. Therefore, appeal filed by the revenue is not maintainable in view of the circular issued by the CBDT No.21 of 2015 dated 10-12-2015.

3.

We have considered the submissions made by both the parties and find that the appeal filed by the revenue is not maintainable in view of the aforesaid circular issued by CBDT. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as such.

4.

The cross objection filed by the assessee is not pressed; hence, the same is also dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →