What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015. This circular applies retrospectively to pending appeals.

The revenue filed an appeal against an order that restricted an addition. The assessee contended that the tax effect of the disputed issue was below the monetary limit for filing appeals to the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect and the CBDT circular on monetary limits for appeals.

ITO vs Aslam Abdul Palasara | ITAT Mumbai 2016

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

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Darsi Suman Ratnam

आदेश ORDER अिमत शु�ला : �या. स.: PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the revenue against impugned order dated 29.11.2011, passed by CIT(A)-35, Mumbai for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 143(3) for the assessment year 2008-09 on the following ground of appeal: i) "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in restricting the addition of Rs.21,76,620/- to Rs. 2,07,720/- being peak credit without appreciating the fact that this account in Axis Bank is the assessee’s personal savings A/c. and not disclosed to the department and peak credit can be worked out only in the case of cash deposits and withdrawals made for business purposes”.

2. At the outset, it is noticed that assessee has filed a letter mentioning that the tax effect on the disputed issue is less than

2 Shri Aslam Abdul Palsara Rs. 10 lakhs and also filed a working of tax. This fact has been admitted by the Ld. DR also. Now in the wake of CBDT’s Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015, the monetary limit prescribed for filing of appeal before the Tribunal is Rs. 10 lakhs. Further it has also been clarified that this circular will apply on pending appeals also which is evident from para 10 of the impugned Circular, which reads as under:- “10. This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending 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 Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.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”.

Thus, the appeal of the revenue is treated as dismissed as non- maintainable.

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd February, 2016.

Sd/- Sd/- (राजेश कुमार) (अिमत शु�ला) लेखा सद�य �याईक सद�य (RAJESH KUMAR) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Date: 22nd February, 2016 ��त/Copy to:- 1) अपीलाथ� /The Appellant. 2) ��यथ� /The Respondent. 3) The CIT(A) -35, Mumbai. 4) The Commissioner of Income Tax-City-25, Mumbai. 5) िवभागीय �ितिनिध ““ए” ”, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई/ The D.R. “A” Bench, Mumbai. 6) गाड� फाईल \ Copy to Guard File.

ITO 25(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. ASLAM ABDUL PALASARA, 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