What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine. This was because the tax effect was below Rs. 10,00,000/- and did not fall under any exceptions specified in the relevant CBDT Circular.

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of a disallowance of Rs. 27,79,769/-. The disallowance was made because expenses claimed were not paid during the year, despite the assessee following the cash system of accounting.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the revenue's appeal based on the tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015.

ITO vs Aditya Ajgaonkar | ITAT Mumbai 2016

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

Before: SHRI G.S.PANNU (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Appellant: Shri. Javed Akhtar

For Respondent: Shri. Aditya Ajgaonkar

Hearing: 22/07/2016Pronounced: 22/07/2016

The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 13/02/2013 passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-26 Mumbai for the Asst. Year 2008-09. 2. The revenue has challenged the impugned order on the following effective grounds of appeal:-

“On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 27,79,769/- made by the Assessing Officer and not appreciating the fact that the assessee is following cash system of accounting and the expenses claimed were not actually paid by the assessee during the year and same were reflected as receivable in the balance sheet of M/s. Aditya Integrated Services as on 31.03.2008.”

The learned authorized representative of the assessee submitted that the tax effect in this case is below Rs.10,00,000/- as the total disallowance made by the AO is Rs. 27,79,769/-. Hence, as per the CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015, the present appeal is not maintainable.

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 22nd July, 2016

ITO WD 15(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. ADITYA AJGAONKAR, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments