ITO 10(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. SANDEEP JAYANT SUKHTANKAR, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3923/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2009-102 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 due to the low tax effect. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. The assessee did not appear, and the Departmental Representative conceded the low tax effect.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM Shri Sandeep Jayant Sukhtankar

For Respondent: Shri Vishwas Jadhav (DR)
Hearing: 30/05/2016Pronounced: 30/05/2016

PER PAWAN SINGH, JM: The above appeal is filed by the Assessing Officer (AO) raising three grounds of appeal for the assessment year mentioned above. The tax effect involved in the above referred case is below the monetary limit (Rs. 10,00,000/-) prescribed by the Central Board of Director Taxes(CBDT), vide its Circular No.21/2015(F.No.142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) dated 10th December, 2015. 2. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee. The Departmental Representative (DR) on a query by the Bench fairly conceded that the tax effect involved in the above case was less than Rs. 10.00 lacs. Considering these facts, we dismiss the appeal holding them as not maintainable u/s. 268A of the Income-tax Act.

3.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 30/05/2016. (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated :30/05/2016 SK, PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

2.

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु"त / CIT "वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →