What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal agreed that the tax involved was less than Rs. 10.00 lacs. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

The Assessing Officer 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?

Maintainability of the appeal due to low tax effect.

Asst.Comm of Income Tax -19(3) vs Afzal J.Ladak | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद�य लेखा सद�य राजे�� राजे�� केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार PER RAJENDRA, AM- लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य राजे�� राजे�� अनुसार अनुसार The above appeal was filed by the Assessing Officer (AO) raising various grounds of appeal

. The tax effect involved in the case is below the monetary limit,(Rs.10,00,000/-) prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT),vide its Circular No.21/2015(F.No. 279/ Misc. 142/ 2007-ITJ (Pt.) dated 10th December, 2015. 2.Authorised Representatives(AR) and the Departmental Representative (DR),agreed that the tax involved in the matter under appeal was less than Rs.10.00 lacs.Therefore,we dismissing the appeal holding it to be not maintainable. As a result, appeal filed by the Assessing Officer stands dismissed. फलतः िनधा�रती अिधकारी �ारा दािखल क� गई अपील नामंजूर क� जाती है. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd,March, 2016. आदेश क� घोषणा खुले �यायालय म� �दनांक 3,माच�,2016 को क� गई । Sd/- Sd/- (अिमत शु�ल/ Amit Shukla) (राजे�� / RAJENDRA) �याियक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांकDated : 03.03.2016. Jv.Sr.PS. आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत 1.Appellant /अपीलाथ�

2. Respondent /��यथ�

5803/M/13-Afzal J Ladak

ASST.COMM OF INCOME TAX -19(3), MUMBAI vs. AFZAL J.LADAK, 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