ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SATISH KUMAR, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2747/DEL/2011Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 March 2016AY 2005-063 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 Revenue's appeal without going into the merits of the case. This was based on a CBDT circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal to Rs. 10 lakhs, and the tax effect in this case being below that limit.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding unexplained creditors and cash deposits, and also regarding expenses after rejecting the assessee's books of accounts. The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 10 lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular, and whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting additions related to unexplained creditors, cash deposits, and expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 145(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. I.C. SUDHIR & SH. O.P. KANT

Hearing: 28.03.2016Pronounced: 31.03.2016

Appellant by None Respondent by S/sh. V.K. Tulsian & Shankar Dwivedi, CA Date of hearing 28.03.2016 Date of pronouncement 31.03.2016 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 24.11.2009 in relation to assessment year 2005-06, raising the following grounds of appeal:

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A)has erred both facts and law deleting an addition of Rs. 13,40,790/- as unexplained creditors and Rs. 7,04,000/- as unexplained cash deposit made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 68 of the IT Act, 1961, as the assessee could not established the identity, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the creditors could be ascertained, however, assessee has failed discharge his primary onus to submit this document and proving the creditworthiness.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) has erred both facts and law deleting an addition of Rs. 6,05,133/- on various 145(3) of the I.T. Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax(A) has not given any reason for accepting the books of accounts of the assessee.

3. The Commissioner of Income Tax(A) has ignored the provisions laid down under sections 68 & 145(3) of the I.T. Act while deleting the addition.

4. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.

2. When the case was called upon, none responded from the side of Department, whereas assessee’s counsel was present. However, Revenue has filed application for adjournment which was rejected by this Bench on the ground that no fruitful purpose would be served to adjourn the matter because the tax effect involved in the matter is less than Rs. 10 lakhs. 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 and the tax effect involved in the instant appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-.

3.

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.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.

The decision is pronounced in the open court on 31st March, 2016.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →