SUNEIL DEV ANAND,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 776/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 December 2016AY 2011-122 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, and the issue was not an exception. Therefore, the Revenue was precluded from pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2010-11. The assessee did not appear for the hearing. The Departmental Representative conceded that the tax effect was less than Rs. 10 lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circulars.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Amit Shukla (JM)

For Respondent: Shri Vaibhav Jain
Hearing: 8.12.2016Pronounced: 8.12.2016

O R D E R Per Amit Shukla (JM) :-

The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 19.1.2015 passed by learned CIT(A)- 2, Thane and it relates to A.Y. 2010-11.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Learned DR fairly admitted that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than ` 10 lakhs.

3.

We have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. We noticed that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than ` 10 lakhs. Hence, the Revenue is precluded from pursuing this appeal as per the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the CBDT. We also noticed that the issue contested in this appeal is not covered by the exception provided in para 8 of the Circular (supra).

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

Order has been pronounced in the Court on 8.12.2016

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →