ITO WD 3(1), THANE vs. PRASANNA M PUJARI, THANE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4943/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 March 2016AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, without going into the merits of the case, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn/not pressed. This was based on the CBDT circular revising monetary limits for appeals, making the current appeal non-maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding salary and allowances received by a non-resident assessee. The tax effect in the case was below the monetary limit specified by a CBDT circular for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect and the CBDT circular on monetary limits for appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 5(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Kirtane (DR)
Hearing: 10/02/2016Pronounced: 10/02/2016

This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai (in short referred to as „CIT(A)‟) dt. 21.4.2014 against the order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short referred to as the „AO‟) u/s. 143(3) dt. 21.12.2010 for A.Y 2008-09 on the following grounds :-

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the CIT(A)-I, has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of salary of Rs 7,04,155/-, which was received by the assessee, who qualified as a non resisdent in India during the year under consideration and such salary accrued or had arisen to him in India from an Indian Company as well as received in India and was therefore taxable in India even though he was non resident as per section 5(2)(b) of the Income tax Act 1961.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the CIT(A)-I, has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of allowances of Rs 19,39,733/-, which was received by the assessee, who qualified as a non resisdent in India during the year under consideration and such allowances accrued or had arisen to him in India from an Indian Company as well as received in India and was therefore taxable in India even though he was non resident as per section 5(2)(b) of the Income tax Act 1961.

3. The appellant prays the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-I, Thane, may be vacated and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any ground/grounds, which may be necessary.”

2.

Shri S.R. Kirtane, learned Departmental Representative (in short „the DR‟) appeared on behalf of the revenue and none appeared on behalf of the assessee.

3.

It has been brought to our notice by the ld. DR that the CBDT vide Circular No.21/2015 dated 10/12/2015 has revised the monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal retrospectively and that the tax effect in this case is below the monetary limit of Rs. 10 lacs specified in para 3 of the CBDT Circular dated 10/12/2015 (supra). The relevant portion of the circular is reproduced below.

“3. Henceforth appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder:-

Sl. No. Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limits (In Rs.) 1. Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000 2. Before High Court 20,00,000 3. Before Supreme Court 25,00,000

.................................................................................................................................

10.

This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/ not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”

(underlined for emphasis by us)

4.

Without going into the merit of the issues raised in the appeal, we deem the appeal to be withdrawn/not pressed as its filing is in contravention of the CBDT Circular dated 10/12/2015(supra). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed by applying the CBDT Circular dated 10/12/2015(supra).

Order pronounced in the open court on 10/02/2016.

More judgments on Section 5(2)(b)

All 54 judgments and leading authorities on Section 5(2)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →