DDIT, BANGALORE vs. NITHYANANDESHWAR DEVASTHANAM TRUST, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 762/BANG/2016Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 March 2016AY 2009-103 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 tax effect of the appeal was below the threshold stipulated by CBDT instructions. Consequently, the appeal was deemed not maintainable due to low tax effect.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order of the CIT(A) concerning an assessment year. The appeal was primarily against an addition made by the AO regarding foreign source receipts.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal due to a low tax effect, as per CBDT instructions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH ‘A’, BANGALORE

For Appellant: Smt. Swapna Das, JCIT
For Respondent: Shri Vishnu Moorthi H, C.A Date of Hearing : 16-3-2017

PER SHRI AK GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

This appeal is filed by the Revenue which is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) -14, LTU, Bangalore dated 28/1/2016 for assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The grounds raised by the Revenue are as under:

3.

At the very outset, it was pointed out by the Bench that as per the assessment order, the addition made by the AO in respect of receipts of foreign sources is only of Rs.20,87,588/- and as per the grounds raised by the Revenue, the grievance is only regarding this addition and therefore, the tax effect in the present case appears to be below 10 lakhs. It was pointed out that because of low tax effect, the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable as per CBDT instructions. In reply, it was submitted by the ld DR of the Revenue that as per the working made available by the AO to him, the tax effect is more than Rs.30 lakhs. At this juncture, it was submitted by the ld AR of the assessee that AO might have worked out the tax effect after considering the deletion of other disallowance made by the AO for Rs.64 lakhs regarding the claim of the assessee for accumulation u/s 11(2) of the Income-tax Act. Since that issue is not raised by the Revenue in the appeal, the tax effect in the present case is definitely below Rs.10 lakhs.

4.

We have considered the rival submissions and in view of the facts noted above, we are satisfied that the tax effect in the present case is below Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, as per the CBDT instruction, this appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable because of low tax effect. The same is dismissed.

5.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17th March, 2017.

More judgments on Section 11(2)

All 762 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →