I.T.O 16(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. LALIT P. SHAH(HUF), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6528/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 July 2016AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, which stipulated that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10 Lakhs should not be filed, unless specific exceptions apply. The Department's counsel admitted the tax effect was below the threshold.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting a disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The tax effect of the appeal was below Rs. 10,00,000.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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 . R.S. Choksi
Hearing: 22/07/2016Pronounced: 22/07/2016

The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 13/08/2013 passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-27 Mumbai for the Asst. Year 2009-10.

2.

The revenue has challenged the impugned order on the following effective grounds of appeal:-

1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A read with rule 8D of the Act of Rs. 18,70,271/-

2. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A read with rule 8D of the Act of Rs. 18,70,271/- and restricting the same to Dividend earned at Rs. 2,57,193/- in contravention of u/s 14A?

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the tax effect in this case is below Rs.10,00,000/- as the total disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules 1962 is Rs. 18,70,271/-. Hence, as per the CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015, the present appeal is not maintainable.

4.

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

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →