DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. REGENT HIRISE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

It is seen, at the outset, that the tax effect on the disputed additions in respect of all the captioned appeals before us are less than Rs. 60 lakh as prescribed in the CBDT’s latest Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 for filing appeals by the Revenue before this Tribunal. 2.1. This circular prescribes that the revised monetary limits shall apply retrospectively to pending appeals as well.

The Ld. DR, however, has submitted that the case of the assessee is covered within the exception as provided under para 3.1(h) of the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024. The said clause (h) of the circular No. 5/2024 is reproduced as under: “h. Cases involving organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries, or”

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, however, has brought our attention to the impugned assessment order as well as the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to submit that there is no allegation or evidence in file that the this case involves organized tax evasion including case of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and case of accommodation entries.

We have heard rival contentions and gone through the impugned assessment order as well as the order of the Ld. CIT(A). In these cases, the revenue is aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of unsecured loan and interest paid thereupon. The facts of the case as well as ground of appeal of the revenue do not suggest that the case is covered within the exception clause as reproduced above. Therefore, these appeals are not maintainable because of the low tax effect in view of the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT vide Circular No. 09/2024 u/s. 268A of the Act.