ITO, WD-5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S S. P. T. COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1174/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 July 2016AY 2008-20093 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, treated the Revenue's appeal as withdrawn or not pressed due to the low tax effect. The appeal was dismissed accordingly.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the deletion of an addition of Rs. 22,84,199/- on account of undisclosed investment, along with related interest and warehouse charges. The tax effect of the appeal was below the revised monetary limit set by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to the tax effect being below the CBDT's prescribed monetary limit for appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B(SMC

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap

This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata dated 25.06.2015 for the assessment year 2008-09 on the following grounds:- 1. " That on the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Kolkata, erred in law and on fact in deleting the addition of Rs.22,84,199/- on account of undisclosed investment of the assessee company without objectively dealing with the material, information, evidences available on records".

2. " That on the facts of the case read with ground no. 1 above, the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Kolkata, erred in deleting interest income of Rs.4,11,199/- in respect of addition of Rs.22,84,199/- on account of undisclosed investment of the assessee company".

3. "That on the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Kolkata, erred in deleting of 25% of warehouse ./2015 Assessment year: 2008-2009 Page 2 of 3

charges debited by the assessee company amounting to Rs.4,24,668/-."

4.

"That on the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Kolkata, erred in allowing relief about the initiation of proceedings u/s, 271(l)(c) in consequence of deletion of addition of Rs.22,84,199/- on account of undisclosed investment of the assessee company."

5.

"That on the facts of the case, the Ld.CIT(A)-2, Kolkata, erred in not allowing the A.O. to receive any notice of fixture from CIT(A) which is against the principles of natural justice."

2 As pointed out by the ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset, the tax effect involved in this appeal of the Revenue is less than the revised monetary limit recently fixed by the CBDT vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 at Rs.10,00,000/- for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal and this position clearly evident from the grounds raised by the Revenue in this appeal is not disputed even by the ld. D.R. In Circular No. 21/2015 (supra) recently issued by the CBDT, the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal has been increased to Rs.10,00,000/- and as clarified in the said Circular, the said monetary limit is applicable retrospectively even to the appeals pending before the Tribunal. The CBDT has also instructed that such pending appeals below this specified tax limit of Rs.10,00,000/- may be withdrawn/ not pressed. Keeping in view the instruction given by the CBDT vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, which is squarely applicable in the present case, the appeal filed by the Revenue in this case is treated as withdrawn/not pressed and dismissed accordingly.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →