What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit of Rs. 10 lakh prescribed by CBDT instruction for filing appeals before the ITAT. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee contended that the tax effect in the appeal was below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

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

ITO vs Antony Buildwell Jv | ITAT Mumbai 2016

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

Before: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

For Respondent: Mr. Anant N. Pai

Hearing: 31/03/2016

आदेश / O R D E R Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 16/12/2013 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

During hearing of this appeal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Anant N. Pai, contended that the tax effect in the present appeal is below the prescribed monetary limit. This factual matrix was not controverted by the ld. DR, Shri M. Murli.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the total income assessed was Rs.10,75,732/- and the payable tax is Rs.3,32,402/-, meaning thereby, the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed limit of Rs.10 lakh for filing the appeal before the Tribunal.

2.2. In view of the fact, that the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed monetary limit, as contained in CBDT instruction No.21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT), applicable with retrospective effect, wherein, the Department was advised/directed by the Board not to file appeal in the cases where the tax effect does not exceed the following monetary limit.:-

Sl. Appeals in Income –tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) No. 1. Before ITAT 10,00,000/- 2. U/s 260 A before Hon’ble High 20,00,000/- Court 3. Before Hon’ble Supreme Court 25,00,000/-

As per the aforesaid instruction/revised monetary limit, the Department is not to file appeal before the Tribunal, wherein, the tax effect is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, consequently, the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. This order was pronounced in the open in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 31/03/2016.

Sd/- Sd/- (Rajendra) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 01/04/2016 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/.�न.स.

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

अपीलाथ� / The Appellant (Respective assessee) 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai.

ITO 25(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. ANTONY BUILDWELL JV, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments