ITO 13(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SANDEEP NATVARLAL GOPANI, MUMBAI

In this appeal, Revenue has raised the following Ground of appeal:- “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs.36,23,363/- on account of non-genuine purchase and restricting the same to Rs.3,15,000/-, which is 8% of such non-genuine purchases, without appreciating the fact that in similar disallowance at 12.5% of non-genuine purchase is a reasonably acceptable proposition?”

At the time of hearing, the Ld. Representative for the assessee pointed out that the pertinent grievance of the Revenue in the above stated Ground of appeal is to the effect that the CIT(A) ought to have restricted the addition on account of genuine purchases to the extent of 12.50% of the amount of purchases instead of 8% done by him. The Ld. Representative for the assessee pointed out that in this view of the matter, the amount of income in dispute is to the extent of Rs.1,77,295/-, which shows that the effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.10.00 lacs prescribed in the CBDT Circular No.21/2015 dated 10/12/2015, which has revised the monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal retrospectively. The Ld. Departmental Representative has not disputed the aforesaid fact-situation. Since the tax effect in dispute in the captioned appeal is stated to be below the monetary limit of Rs.10.00 lacs specified in the CBDT Circular dated 10/12/2015 (supra), the same is dismissed as not maintainable.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.