DCIT CIR-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ANDREW YULE AND COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1916/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 December 2024AY 2013-14Bench: SRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1916/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 D.C.I.T, Cir-4(1), Kolkata ………. Appellant Vs. Andrew Yule & Company Limited ......... Respondent Yule House, 8 Dr. Rajendra Prasad Sarani, Kolkata-700001. (PAN: AACCA4245Q) Appearances: Appellant represented by : Shri Bonnine Debbarma, Addl. CIT, DR Respondent represented by : N o n e Date of concluding the hearing : December 9th, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : D2 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 noted that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The tax effect on the disputed additions was less than Rs. 60 lakh, as per the CBDT's circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the low tax effect below the prescribed monetary limits as per CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SRI SANJAY GARG & SRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Bonnine Debbarma, Addl. CIT, DR

Date of concluding the hearing : December 9th, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : December 9th, 2024 ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 01.05.2024 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'].

2.

It is seen, at the outset, that the tax effect on the disputed additions before us is less than Rs. 60 lakh as prescribed in the CBDT’s latest I.T.A. No.: 1916/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Andrew Yule & Co. Ltd. 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.

3.

The ld. DR has also fairly stated that tax effect involved in appeal is less than the prescribed limit.

4.

In view of above stated position, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed u/s 268A of the Act because of low tax effect than the prescribed limits as per CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 (supra).

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →