What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal without going into the merits of the case. This was based on a CBDT circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals to the Tribunal to Rs. 10,00,000/-, and the tax effect in this appeal was below that limit.

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition of Rs. 17,14,000/- on account of unexplained cash. The assessee claimed the amount was borrowed from M/s Ahura Holdings, but no corresponding entry was found in the books of either party.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be dismissed due to the tax effect being below the revised monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals to the Tribunal.

ACIT vs Sh. Shridev Sharma, New Delhi | ITAT Delhi 2016

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

Before: SH. H.S. SIDHU & SH. O.P. KANT

Hearing: 25.05.2016Pronounced: 27.05.2016

ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) dated 16.09.2013 in relation to assessment year 2004-05, raising the following grounds of appeal: On the facts and on the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in 1. deleting the addition of Rs. 17,14.000/- on account of unexplained cash. On the facts and on the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in 2. deleting the addition of Rs. 17,14,000/- on account of unexplained cash whereas the assessee has himself stated in his statements that this money was borrowed by him from M/s Ahura Holdings. However, in the books of accounts of the assessee as well as of M/s Ahura Holdings no such entry of Rs. 17,00,000/- is appearing, as being claimed by the assessee. The appellant craves leave to add. alter or amend any of the grounds of appeal 3. before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.?

None present on behalf of the assessee. We have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the relevant material on record. It is noticed that the CBDT has issued Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015 with retrospective effect, revising the monetary limit to Rs.10,00,000/- for not filing appeals before the Tribunal. The ld. Sr. Departmental Representative, although supported the order of the Assessing Officer, but could not controvert the fact that tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-.

From para 10 of the above Circular, it is palpable that the Instruction is applicable to the pending appeals also with retrospective effect and there is a clear-cut direction to the Department to withdraw or not press such appeals filed before the ITAT, wherein tax effect is less than Rs.10,00,000/-. Going by the prescription of the afore-noted Circular, we are of the view that the Revenue should have either not filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal or withdrawn the same as the tax effect in this appeal is admittedly less than the prescribed limit i.e. Rs. 10,00,000/- for not filing the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the instant appeal without going into merits of the case. However, the Department is at liberty to file the Miscellaneous Application, if the tax effect is more than the prescribed limited of Rs. 10 lacs or otherwise.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed. The decision is pronounced in the open court on 27th May, 2016.

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SHRIDEV SHARMA, NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments