What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The appeal was held to be not maintainable due to the low tax effect.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether an appeal with a tax effect below the CBDT's prescribed monetary limit is maintainable.

ACIT vs Nalin P. Shah | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM Shri Nalin P. Shah,

For Appellant: Shri Mihir Shah

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Sonkar (DR), Shri Mihir Shah

Hearing: 04/04/2016Pronounced: 04/04/2016

PER PAWAN SINGH, JM: The above appeal is filed by the Assessing Officer (AO) raising 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. Mihir 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.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 04/04/2016. (R.C. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 04/04/2016 SK, PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु"त / CIT "वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. ///

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.

ASST CIT 14(1), MUMBAI vs. NALIN P. SHAH, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments