ITO (TDS 2(3), MUMBAI vs. MIDAS EVENTS P.LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3887/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 June 2016AY 2008-093 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 held that the appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below Rs. 10,00,000/- and did not fall under any exceptions mentioned in the CBDT Circular. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order directing re-computation of penalty. The appeal was filed for the assessment year 2005-06, though the heading mentions 2008-09.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal based on the tax effect and CBDT circulars. The appeal also questioned the re-computation of penalty for failure to furnish TDS returns.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(2)(k),Section 200(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Appellant: Shri. Durga Dutt
Hearing: 14/06/2016Pronounced: 14/06/2016

This appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 14/03/2012 passed by the Ld CIT(Appeals)-31, Mumbai for the assessment year 2005-06.

2.

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

i). “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to re-compute the penalty u/s 272A(2)(K)of the I.T. Act from the date of deposit of tax by the assessee till the date of filing TDS return. ii). The Ld CIT(A) has erred, in facts and circumstances of the case and law, in not appreciating the provisions of section 272A(2)(k) r.w.s. 200(3) which clearly state that the penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) will be attracted when the assessee fails to furnish TDS return within the due dates prescribed in Rule 31A.”

3.

The case was called for hearing, however, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We notice that the tax effect in this case is below Rs.10,00,000/- and 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 14th. June, 2016

More judgments on Section 272A(2)(k)

All 249 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(2)(k) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →