What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the tax effect in the appeal was indeed below Rs. 10 lakhs. Consequently, the appeal was deemed not maintainable under the relevant CBDT circular.

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee contended that the tax effect was below Rs. 10 lakhs, making the appeal not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the ITAT due to a low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.

DCIT vs Nico Extrusions P.Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

For Appellant: Shri B. Satyanarayana Rao, DR

For Respondent: Shri Paresh Shparia

Hearing: 03.10.2016Pronounced: 03.10.2016

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue on 25.08.2014 is against the order of the CIT (A)-17, Mumbai dated 16.06.2014 for the assessment year 2011-2012. 2. Before us, at the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee briefly narrated the facts of the case and mentioned that the only issue involved in this appeal relates to the disallowance of Rs. 30,36,670/- on account of unrealised loss. In this regard, he submitted that the tax effect involved in this appeal is below Rs. 10 lakhs and therefore, this appeal is not maintainable as per the CBDT Circular no.21/2015. After hearing the Ld DR for the Revenue 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 are not maintainable. We order accordingly.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd October, 2016. (AMARJIT SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक 03.10.2016 व.नन.स./ OKK , Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अऩीराथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A)- 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT 4. 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 8(2), MUMBAI vs. NICO EXTRUSIONS P.LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Latest GST High Court judgments