What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal. This was based on the CBDT's circular which sets a monetary limit for appeals and applies retrospectively to pending cases.

The Department appealed an order of the Commissioner (Appeals) for the assessment year 2004-05. The tax effect of the disputed amount was below the monetary limit set by the CBDT for appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Department's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT considering the tax effect and the CBDT's monetary limit for appeals.

ACIT vs Hiren M Shah | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Paras S. Savla

For Respondent: Shri J.P. Jangid

Date of Hearing – 01.11.2016 Date of Order – 18.11.2016

O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.

The aforesaid appeal of the Department is directed against the order dated 19th December 2014, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)–32, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2004–05.

At the outset, the learned Departmental Representative submitted before us that the tax effect pertaining to the amount disputed by the Department is less than the monitory limit of ` 10 lakh fixed by the CBDT in Circular no.21 of 2015 dated 10th December

2 Shri Hiren M. Shah 2015, in relation to appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Taking into consideration the aforesaid submissions of the learned Departmental Representative and also finding that the CBDT circular under reference applies retrospectively, even to pending appeals, we dismiss the appeal of the Department as not maintainable.

In the result, appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18.11.2016

ACIT 20(1), MUMBAI vs. HIREN M SHAH, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Latest GST High Court judgments