ITO WD 25(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. VALLABH RATHI (HUF), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 838/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 July 2016AY 2006-072 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 noted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit. The Departmental Representative also conceded this fact.

What were the facts?

The Department filed an appeal for assessment year 2006-07. The tax effect involved in the case was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal was maintainable given the low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI A.D.JAIN

Pronounced: 04.07.2016

सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date of Hearing : 04. 07.2016 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date of Pronouncement :04.07.2016 आदेश / O R D E R PER A D JAIN (JM) This is department’s appeal for assessment year 2006-07 challenging the order of ld.CIT(A) dated 14.11.2014 2. We find from the orders of authorities below that the tax effect involved in the above referred case is below the monetary limit (Rs. 10,00,000/-) prescribed by the Central Board of Director Taxes(CBDT), vide its Circular No.21/2015(F.No.l42/2007-ITJ (Pt.) dated 10th December, 2015.

3.

Shri Kapil Seth Shah appeared on behalf of the assessee. The Departmental Representative (DR) on a query by the Bench fairly conceded that the tax effect

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →