ITO 2(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. MAHINDRA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INVESTMENT P. LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1646/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 March 2017AY 2008-092 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 filed by the Revenue was not maintainable because the tax effect was less than Rs. 10,00,000/-, as per CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2008-09. The penalty amount was Rs. 5,84,843/-.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA

For Appellant: Shri Suman kumar(DR)
For Respondent: Shri Prasad Bapat (AR)
Hearing: 08.03.2017

Per Ashwani Taneja, AM:- This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-5 [hereinafter called CIT(A)] dated 27.12.2013 passed against the penalty order dated 24.08.2012 u/s 271(1)(c) for assessment year 2008-09.

1.

2 Mahindra Tele I.T.A.No. 1646/Mum/2014 2. During the course of hearing, both the parties jointly stated that this appeal filed by the Revenue involves penalty of Rs. 5,84,843/- and since the tax effect in this case is less than Rs. 10,00,000/-, therefore the present appeal is not maintainable in view of circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes [hereinafter called CBDT] No21 of 2015, dated 10.12.2015.

3.

We have gone through the facts of the case and find that the tax effect in this case is less than Rs. 10,00,000/-, therefore the present appeal is not maintainable and dismissed, as such.

4.

Our appeal shall have no bearing on the merits of the issues raised in this appeal.

5.

As a result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order was pronounced in the open court at the conclusion of hearing.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →