What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect of the Revenue's appeal was below the prescribed monetary limit for filing an appeal. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Revenue appealed an order of the CIT(A) that deleted disallowances of long-term capital loss. The assessee also filed a cross-objection supporting the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal should be withdrawn due to low tax effect, as per CBDT instructions.

DCIT vs Nitin L.. Jobanputra | ITAT Mumbai 2017

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

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Respondent: Shri Rutuja Pawar

Hearing: 12/01/2017

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member)

The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 30/03/2014 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, deleting the disallowances made of long term capital loss of Rs.10,36,875/-. The assessee has also preferred cross objection in support of the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal).

During hearing, the ld. DR, Shri Suman Kumar, requested the Bench to grant permission to withdraw the appeal, being low tax effect involved, below prescribed monetary limit. The ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Rutuja Pawar, had no objection if the Department is permitted to withdraw the appeal, filed by the Revenue.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the C.O. No.224/Mum/2015 Nitin L Jobanputra above, it is noted that the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed limit of Rs.10 lakh for filing the appeal before the Tribunal, as contained in CBDT instruction No.21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT), applicable with retrospective effect, wherein, the Department was advised/directed by the Board not to file appeal in the cases where the tax effect does not exceed the following monetary limit.:-

Sl. Appeals in Income –tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) No. 1. Before ITAT 10,00,000/- 2. U/s 260 A before Hon’ble High 20,00,000/- Court 3. Before Hon’ble Supreme Court 25,00,000/- In view of the above instruction, since, the tax effect is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn.

Now, we shall take up the cross objection of the assessee (C.O. No.224/Mum/2015), which was argued to be in support of the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). Since, we have dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, affirming the stand of the First Appellate Authority, therefore, the cross objection of the assessee has remained for academic interest only, therefore, dismissed as in-fructuous. Finally, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed.

C.O. No.224/Mum/2015 Nitin L Jobanputra

This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representatives of both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 12/01/2017.

DCIT 20(2), MUMBAI vs. NITIN L.. JOBANPUTRA, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments