ITO 14(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. KISHORE LAKHANI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 747/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 August 2016AY 2002-032 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 monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. As the issue did not fall under any exceptions, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning assessment year 2002-03. The tax effect involved in the appeal was less than ₹10 lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed in limine due to low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Sanjay Garg (JM)

For Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran
Hearing: 24.8.2016Pronounced: 24.8.2016

O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :-

The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 4.11.2013 passed by learned CIT(A)- 25, Mumbai and it relates to A.Y. 2002- 03.

2.

The Revenue is aggrieved by the decision of learned CIT(A) in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 69 of the Act.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Learned DR fairly admitted that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than ` 10 lakhs.

4.

We have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. We noticed that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than ` 10 lakhs. Hence, the Revenue is precluded from pursuing this appeal as per the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the CBDT. We also noticed

2 Shri Kishore Lakhani that the issue contested in this appeal is not covered by the exception provided in para 8 of the Circular (supra).

5.

In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal of the Revenue in limine. Order has been pronounced in the Court on 24.8.2016

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →