ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VIJAY B KHANDELWAL , NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 107/NAG/2020Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 October 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI V. DURGA RAO (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the tax effect of the disputed amount was below the revised monetary limit of Rs. 60 lakh as per CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2024. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2014-15, challenging additions on account of unexplained cash credit and disallowances of interest expenses. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the revised monetary limit for appeals to the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 36(1)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani
For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Date of Hearing – 22/10/2024 Date of Order – 25/10/2024

O R D E R PER BENCH

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 14/07/2020, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2014–15.

2.

In its appeal, the Revenue has raised following grounds:– “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) was justified in directing addition made by the AO amounting to Rs. 1,22,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 in spite of the fact that the assessee could not prove creditworthiness of the creditor M/s ECPL.

2. Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the additions made by the AO amounting to Rs. 33,63,445/- on account of disallowances u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act, in spite of the fact that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs. 33,63,445/- as interest expenses.

2 Shri Vijay B. Khandelwal ITA no.107/Nag./2020

3. Any other ground that may be raised during the proceedings.”

3.

At the outset, the leaned Authorised Representative appearing for the assessee submitted that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue is below the revised monetary limit of ` 60 lakh applicable to appeals before the Tribunal, as per CBDT Circular no.09 of 2024, dated 17/09/2024. Thus, the learned A.R. submitted that the Revenue’s appeals being covered under the aforesaid Circular are not maintainable.

4.

The learned Departmental Representative agreed that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue is below the monetary limit of ` 60 lakh for both the years under consideration.

5.

Having heard the arguments of rival parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below, we are of the view that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue in the present appeal is below the revised monetary limit of ` 60 lakh as per CBDT Circular cited supra. It also stands clarified by the CBDT that the revised monetary limit of ` 60 lakh, as per the aforesaid CBDT Circulars, would also apply to all pending appeals. In view of the aforesaid, Revenue’s appeals deserve to be dismissed. However, the Revenue is given liberty to seek recall of this order if, at a later point of time, it is found that the appeal fall under any of the exceptions provided in the CBDT Circular referred to above.

3 Shri Vijay B. Khandelwal ITA no.107/Nag./2020

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/10/2024

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →