Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI N.K. PRADHAN, AM (A.Y:2005-06) Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Asian Heart Institute & 455 Aayakar Bhavan, 4 th Floor, Research Centre P. Ltd., M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020 Vs. GN Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 PAN No.AACC8811C Appellant .. Respondent Assessee by .. Shri. B.S Bist, DR Revenue by .. None Date of hearing .. 12-01-2017 Date of pronouncement .. 12-01-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT (A)-21, Mumbai in appeal No. CIT (A)-21/IT/32/2011-12 dated 02-04-2012. The Assessment was framed by ACIT Circle-10(1), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2005-06 vide order dated 05-12- 2007 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). The penalty was levied by the ACIT Circle-10(1) u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide order dated 31-03-2011.
At the outset, it is seen that the relief allowed by CIT(A) on account of deletion penalty levied by AO for concealment of income u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,65,736/-. Hence, net tax effect in this appeal of revenue on the disputed additions made by AO and deleted by CIT (A), is less than Rs. 10 lacs.
During the course of hearing before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee, pointed out that in this case, the net tax demand is Rs.6,65,736/- and thus, the tax effect in this appeal is below Rs.10.00 lacs. The learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in view of the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 brought out by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the appeal was not maintainable and be dismissed. The learned Sr. DR also agreed to the facts stated by the learned Counsel for the assessee but could not point out whether this case falls under any of the exception provided in the Circular. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find from the records before us that the tax involved in the disputed issue is below Rs.10 lacs and therefore, in view of the circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 no appeal should be filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal which has tax effect of Rs. 10.00 lacs or less and this circular is also applicable retrospectively to all pending appeals. The relevant extract the said CBDT Circular (Supra) is as under: - “This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.” 5. Considering the above, the appeal filed by the Revenue, is therefore, dismissed. 6. In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 12-01-2017.