ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SHAKEEL AHMED, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 994/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2016AY 2009-102 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 departmental appeal. It relied on CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals before the ITAT to Rs. 10 lakh and was made applicable retrospectively.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal challenging the deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) by the CIT(A). The penalty was levied on an addition of unexplained cash deposit. The tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 10 lakh.

What were the issues?

Whether the departmental appeal should be dismissed based on the revised monetary limits for appeals stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, considering the tax effect involved.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH & SH.L.P.SAHU

Hearing: 02.05.2016Pronounced: 05.05.2016

Date of Hearing 02.05.2016 Date of Pronouncement 05.05.2016 ORDER

PER DIVA SINGH, JM

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue assailing the correctness of the order dated 29.12.2015 of CIT(A)-19, New Delhi pertaining to 2009-10 assessment year on the following grounds:

– 1. “The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is bad in law and not in consonance with facts of the case.

2. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and also on facts by deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) levied at Rs.1,09,130/- on addition of unexplained cash deposit.

3. The relief given by the Ld.CIT(A on quantum issue (vide order No.215/14-15 dated 29.12.2015) has been appealed agaist (appeal in ITAT filed on 17.02.2016). The present issue of penalty, under consideration, is required to be agitated and to be clubbed with the above mentioned appeal.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, allow or amend any or all the ground of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

2. The quashing of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) levied at Rs.1,09,130/- is challenged by the Revenue. No one was present at the time hearing on behalf of the assessee. Considering the amount at stake for the Revenue, Ld. Sr. DR was I.T.A .No.-994/Del/2016 required to address Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 of CBDT. Considering the same in the facts on record, the Ld. Sr. DR fairly conceded that the departmental appeal has been filed wherein the tax effect involved is much less than Rs.10 lakh.

3.

We have heard the submissions of the parties on this issue and perused the material on record. We find that the CBDT vide the aforesaid Circular dated 10.12.2015 has revised the monetary limit to Rs.10 lakh for filing the appeal by the department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Para 3 of the aforesaid Circular has been made applicable vide para 10 retrospectively. Considering the settled legal precedent that the Board’s instructions or directions issued to the Income Tax Authorities u/s 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are binding on the authorities, we dismiss the departmental appeal considering the material available on record.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 05 May, 2016.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →