ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI vs. SANJAY DUTT, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1113/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 November 2016AY 2008-092 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 as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, appeals with a tax effect of Rs. 10 lacs or less should not be filed or pressed. This circular is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which deleted additions made by the AO. The net tax effect in the appeal was below Rs. 10 lacs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the low tax effect, in light of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri. B.S. Bist, DR, Shri Stany Saldanha, AR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND ASHWANI TANEJA, AM (A.Y:2008-09) Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Shri Sanjay Dutt 11(1), Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan, Sunrise, 24th Road, Bandra (W), Vs. K.K. Marg, Mumbai-20 Mumbai-400050 PAN No.AAJPD2027K .. Appellant Respondent Revenue by .. Shri. B.S. Bist, DR .. Shri Stany Saldanha, AR Assessee by Date of hearing .. 30-11-2016 .. Date of pronouncement 30-11-2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT (A)-3, Mumbai in appeal No. CIT(A)-3/Addl. CIT/11(1)/IT-359/10-11 dated 30-11-2012. The Assessment was framed by ACIT Range-11(1), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2008-09 vide order dated 31-12-2010 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, it is seen that the relief allowed by CIT(A) on account of deletion of addition of notional interest on interest free deposits amounting to Rs.6,30,00/- and addition made u/s 14A of the Act amounting to Rs.2,29,125/-, thereby the total addition is Rs.8,59,125/-. The net tax demand will be Rs.2,74,920/-. Hence, net tax effect in this appeal of revenue on the disputed additions made by AO and deleted by CIT (A), is less than Rs. 10 lacs.

3.

During the course of hearing before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee, pointed out that in this case, the net tax demand is Rs.2,74,920/- and thus, the tax effect in this appeal is below Rs.10.00 lacs. The learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in view of the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 brought out by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the appeal was not maintainable and be dismissed. The learned Sr. DR also agreed to the facts stated by the learned Counsel for the Circular.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find from the records before us that the tax involved in the disputed issue is below Rs.10 lacs and therefore, in view of the circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 no appeal should be filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal which has tax effect of Rs. 10.00 lacs or less and this circular is also applicable retrospectively to all pending appeals. The relevant extract the said CBDT Circular (Supra) is as under: - “This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”

5.

Considering the above, the appeal filed by the Revenue, is therefore, dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30-11-2016.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →