What did the Tribunal hold?

The Departmental Representative conceded that the tax involved was less than Rs. 10.00 lacs. Therefore, the tribunal dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.

The Assessing Officer (AO) filed an appeal before the ITAT. It was noted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

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

DCIT vs Shobhana Majithia | ITAT Mumbai 2017

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ PER Rajendra A.M.- अनुसार The above appeal was filed by the Assessing Officer(AO)raising two grounds of appeal. It was noticed that tax effect involved in the case under consideration was below the monetary limit, (Rs.10,00,000/-),prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), vide its Circular No. 21/2015(F.No.279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) dated 10th December, 2015. 2.During the course of hearing before us,the Departmental Representative (DR)fairly conceded that the tax involved in the appeal was less than Rs.10.00 lacs.Considering these facts,we dismiss the appeal holding it as not maintainable. As a result,appeal filed by the Assessing Officer stands dismissed. फलतः िनधा"रती अिधका री "ारा दािखल क" गई अपील नामंजूर क" जाती है. Order pronounced in the open court on 09th ,January 2017. आदेश क" घोषणा खुले "यायालय म" "दनांक 09 जनवरी, 2017 को क" गई । ( पवन"सह/Pawan singh) (राजे"" / RAJENDRA) "याियक सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER सद"य मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांकDated : 09.01.2017. Jv.Sr.PS.

DCIT CC 44, MUMBAI vs. SHOBHANA MAJITHIA, MUMBAI

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