JCIT 24(2), MUMBAI vs. SHAZAD S. RUSTOMJI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5276/MUM/2012Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2016AY 2008-093 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 in limine. It was held that the tax effect was below the monetary limit specified in the CBDT circular, and the appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 10,55,925/- made on account of transport charges. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the threshold specified by CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 194

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Appellant: Shri. K.Mohandas
For Respondent: Shri. S.A.Tinwala
Hearing: 23/05/2016Pronounced: 23/05/2016

This appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 26/06/2012 passed by the Ld CIT(A)-34, Mumbai for the assessment year 2008-09.

2.

The revenue has challenged the impugned order on following effective ground:-

1.

On the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,55,925/- made by the AO on account of transport charges u/s 40(a)(ia), without appreciating that the assessee should have deducted TDS in accordance with the provisions of section 194 of the I.T.Act, 1961.

3 At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition involved in this case (on record on account of transport charges u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961) is Rs. 10,55,925/-tax effect in this case is below 10 Lakhs 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 23rd May, 2016

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →