ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI vs. AFTAB P SHIVDASANI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1200/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 June 2016AY 2009-103 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 in the appeal was below Rs. 10,00,000/-. As per CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, the appeal was not maintainable, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting the disallowance of depreciation on a motor car. The Assessing Officer had disallowed depreciation at 50%, while the assessee claimed it. The appeal was filed for assessment year 2009-10.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not specified

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Appellant: Shri. Morya Pratap
Hearing: 02/06/2016Pronounced: 02/06/2016

This appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 09/11/2012 passed by the Ld CIT(A)-3, Mumbai for the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

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

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance made by the A.O. on account of depreciation of motor car @ 50% claimed by the assessee.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in not appreciating that item III(2) of depreciation table pertains to motor cars other that those used in the business of hire, which is applicable to the facts of the instant assessee and item III(3) (via) of the depreciation table is applicable to new commercial vehicles that are used for the business of hire.

3. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.

3.

We noticed 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 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 2nd June, 2016

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →