What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the tax effect in the case was below Rs. 10 lakhs. Therefore, the appeal was covered by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which mandates dismissal of appeals with such tax effect.

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order cancelling penalty on additions made for written advances and prior period expenses. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below Rs. 10 lakhs, making CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 applicable.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable when the tax effect is below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

DCIT vs Tipco Industries Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI C.N. PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri Akhilendra Yadav, DR

Hearing: 09.11.2016Pronounced: 09.11.2016

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue on 07.6.2013 is against the order of the CIT (A)-20, Mumbai dated 11.3.2013 for the assessment year 2004-2005. 3. In this case, the Revenue is aggrieved with the CIT (A)’s decision in cancelling the penalty on the additions on account of advances written amounting to Rs. 7,15,209/- and prior period expenses amounting to Rs. 2,33,864/-. In this regard, at the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the since, the tax effect involved in this case is below Rs. 10 lakhs, the CBDT Circular No.21/2015 applies to the present case.

After hearing the Ld Representatives of both the parties and on perusal of the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the relevant material placed before us, we find, the tax effect in this case is below Rs. 10 lakhs. Therefore, this case is covered by the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 which is relevant for the proposition that the appeals filed by the Revenue with a tax effect of Rs. 10 lakhs and below are to be either dismissed by the Tribunal as not maintainable or not pressed by the Revenue. Considering the same, the present appeal filed by the Revenue is required to be dismissed since, the same is not maintainable. We order accordingly.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 09th November, 2016. (C.N. PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक 09.11.2016 व.नन.स./ OKK , Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. 2. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. 3. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A)- 4. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR,

ITAT, Mumbai गार्ड पाईर / Guard file. 6. सत्मावऩत प्रनत ////

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

DCIT 9(3), MUMBAI vs. TIPCO INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments