Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)
This appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 21/03/2014 passed by the Ld CIT(A)-34, Mumbai for the assessment year 2010-11.
The revenue has challenged the impugned order on following effective grounds of appeal:-
1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 12,75,000/- made on account of gift received and adjudicating the appeal in favour of the assessee when the gift received form HUF cannot be treated as exempt as HUF does not comprise in the definition of close
relative as per the provisions of section 56(2)(v) of the Act and thus misinterpreting the unambiguous language of the aforesaid section.”
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 19,87,065/- made on account of excess interest paid in term loan ignoring the fact that the assessee had paid higher interest on loans taken as compared to the interest received at lower rates.”
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the tax effect in this case is below 10,00,000/- the addition of Rs. 19,87,065/- made on account of gift received. Hence, as per the CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015, the present appeal is not maintainable.
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