ITO 25(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. AMRUTLAL CHHEDA, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6648/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 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 dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The appeal was considered not maintainable due to the low tax effect.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer filed an appeal before the ITAT. The tax effect in the case was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars for filing appeals.

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, “A”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM Shri Amrutlal V. Chheda,

For Appellant: Shri B.D. Naik (DR)
For Respondent: Shri Bhupendra Shah
Hearing: 18/05/2016

Appellant by : Shri B.D. Naik (DR) Respondent by : Shri Bhupendra Shah Date of Hearing : 18/05/2016 Date of Order : 18/05/2016 O R D E R

PER PAWAN SINGH, JM:

1.

The above appeal is filed by the Assessing Officer (AO) raising only one Ground 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. Shri Bhupendra Shah 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 Act. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

3. Order pronounced in the open court on this 18/05/2016. Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY ARORA) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 18/05/2016 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

More judgments on Section 268A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →