A.C.I.T.. 2(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S ANUPCHAND TILOKCHAND JEWELLERS P. LRD, RAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 74/BIL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 January 2018AY 2005-063 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which increased the monetary limit for filing appeals to the ITAT to Rs. 10 lakhs. The circular was applicable retrospectively to pending appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 17,47,375/- on account of Director's Education expenses. The tax effect of the appeal was below Rs. 10 lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT based on the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, AR
For Respondent: DR Assessee by :, Shri R.B.Doshi, AR
Hearing: 18/01/2018Pronounced: 18/01/2018

Per Shri N.S.Saini, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A), Raipur, dated 10.02.2015 for the assessment year 2005-2006. 2. The Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal :- a. "Whether on facts and law and in circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) was justified in allowing the deduction u/s.37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.17,47,375/- on account of Director’s Education expenses when the assessee failed to establish commercial expediency of such expenditure?" b. "The Order of the Ld. CIT (A) is erroneous both in law and on facts?" c. "Any other ground that may be adduced at the time of hearing?"

3.

At the outset, the AR of the assessee submitted that the total tax demand in this appeal as evident from the order of CIT(A) is Rs.8,69,590/- The present appeal of the Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.17,47,375/- on account of Director’s Education expenses. Thus, the tax effect in the present appeal of Revenue is below Rs.10 lakhs. Therefore, in view of the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated

2 10th December, 2015, appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable and, hence, liable to be dismissed.

4.

On the other hand, ld.DR for the Revenue agreed with the submission of ld.AR of the assessee. We find that the CBDT in Circular No.21/2015, dated 10th

5.

December, 2015, has stated that, as a measure for reducing litigation, it was increasing the monetary limits for filing of appeals by the department before the ITAT and High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court. The said limit for not filing appeal to the Tribunal was fixed at Rs.10 lakhs. The CBDT has further stated that the said instruction shall apply retrospectively to pending appeals and that all appeals below the specified tax limits should be withdrawn/not pressed. However, appeals before the Supreme Court are to be governed by the limits operative at the time that the appeal was filed. The said Circular of the CBDT is binding on the officers of Income Tax Department. In view of this, we hold that the present appeal of the Revenue before the Tribunal is not maintainable and, hence, we dismiss the same in limine.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on Thursday, the 18th Day of January, 2018 at Raipur. (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (N. S. SAINI) न्याययक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Raipur; ददन ांक Dated 18/01/2018 प्र.कु.मि/PKM, Senior Private Secretary आदेश की प्रयिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱ थी / The Appellant- 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 2. आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), 3. 3 आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभ गीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, Raipur / DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. ग र्ड प ईऱ / Guard file. 6. सत्य वऩत प्रतत ////

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, (Senior Private Secretary) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur

More judgments on Section 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →