ITO 21(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. SIDDHI M. PANDHI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1869/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 September 2016AY 2009-103 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 dismissed the appeal in limine. It was held that the tax effect in the appeal was below Rs. 10,00,000/- and did not fall under any exceptions specified in the CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s order which deleted an addition of Rs. 13,92,000/- made on account of interest received from Sardar Sarovar Nigam Board. The Revenue also challenged the CIT(A)'s consideration of certain dates and the assessee's disclosure of interest income.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the revenue's appeal due to low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars. The substantive issues regarding the addition of interest income were not adjudicated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Respondent: Ms. Kanchan Deshmukh
Hearing: 28/09/2016Pronounced: 28/09/2016

This appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 05/12/2012 passed by the Ld CIT(Appeals)-32, Mumbai for the assessment year 2009-10, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against assessment order dated 26/12/2011 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. The revenue has challenged the impugned order on following effective grounds:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 13,92,000/- made by the A.O on account of interest received from Sardar Sarovar Nigam Board.

2.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering that the assessee had not transferred the amount of Rs. 13,42,286/- to the account of Ms. Rekha Pandhi till 18/02/2009.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering that the assessee had not disclosed the receipt of interest in her return of income through the same was credited in her bank account and TDS also claimed on the same.

3.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the tax effect in this case is below Rs.10,00,000/- and as per the CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015, the present appeal is not maintainable.

4.

The Ld. DR fairly admitted that the tax effect in department’s appeal is below Rs.10 Lakhs, We find that the issue raised in appeal does not fall under any of the exceptions specified in para 8 of the Circular. Since, it has been specifically clarified in the Circular aforesaid that the instruction will apply retrospectively to all the pending appeals; the present appeal filed by the revenue is not maintainable. We, therefore, dismiss the same in limine.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28th September, 2016

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →