ACIT CEN CIR 32, MUMBAI vs. ACKRUTI CITY LTD, MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine. This was based on the CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, as the tax effect of the appeal was below Rs. 10 Lakhs and did not fall under any exceptions.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an order of the CIT(A) concerning assessment year 2010-11. The appeal raised issues regarding deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) and the treatment of debenture redemption reserve for MAT computation.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal due to low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars. The substantive issues of deemed dividend and MAT computation were not adjudicated on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)
This appeal has been filed by the revenue against order dated 30/12/2013 passed by Ld CIT(A)-41, Mumbai for the assessment year 2010-11.
The revenue has challenged the impugned order on following effective grounds:- 1. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act holding that the loan received by the assessee from its 100% subsidiary is not in the manner of deemed dividend though the total accumulated profit of the subsidiary during the current year is Rs. 18,90,324/-.”
2. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the debenture redemption reserve is not a ‘reserve’ within the meaning of Explanation 1(b) of section 115JB of the Act, 1961.”
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the 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. The Ld. Counsel also placed on record a calculation sheet, as per which the total tax effect on addition under section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(in short ‘the Act.’) comes to Rs. 6,40,820/-.
The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the ground no.2 pertains to computation of book profit, and the tax effect thereof is irrelevant because as per assessment order dated 05/03/2013 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, the tax payable under the normal provisions of the Act is higher than the tax payable u/s 115JB of the Act.
The Ld. DR fairly conceded 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 appeal in limine.
More judgments on Section 2(22)(e)
- Sindhu Farms Pvt Ltd, Gurugram vs DCIT, RohtakITA 8194/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Pranav Prakashchandra Kansara, Ahmedabad vs ITO Ward 5 3 2 Ahmedabad, Aayakar Bhavan…ITA 911/AHD/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Pranav Prakashchandra Kansara, Ahmedabad vs ITO Ward 5 3 2 Ahmedabad, Aayakar Bhavan…ITA 911/AHD/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- M/S. Jsw Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6051/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- M/S. Jsw Cement Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4867/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026