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 12/11/2012 passed by the Ld CIT(A)-3, Mumbai for the assessment year 2009-10.
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 depreciation of Rs. 4,05,000/- disallowed by the A.O. and ignored the facts that the assessee has not given any evidences to prove the speed boat was put to use and wholly and exclusively used for business purpose during the impugned assessment year.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,05,000/- relying on fresh evidences produced before him in contravention of the provisions of Rule 46A.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition made u/s 14A rule 8D amounting to Rs. 5,41,324/-.
4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in ignoring the provisions of Section u/s 14A(3) wherein it is provided that section u/s 14A can be invoked even in cases where an assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred in relation to exempt income.
5. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(Appeals) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the tax effect in this case is below 10,00,000/- as the depreciation made u/s 14A rule 8D of the Act. 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.