Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI
आदेश / O R D E R
Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 12/02/2013 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.
M/s Kukreja Builders Pvt. Ltd.
During hearing of this appeal, it was brought to the knowledge of the Bench by the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Naresh Kumar, that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is below prescribed monetary limit. This factual matrix was consented to be correct by the ld. DR, Shri G. N. Makwana.
2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the Ld. Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs.5,20,490/- on account of interest free loans. The tax effect involved in the 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 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), with retrospective effect and advised/directed the Department 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/-
M/s Kukreja Builders Pvt. Ltd.
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, in view of uncontroverted contention of the ld. DR and the aforementioned Circular no. 21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT), of CBDT, 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 court in the presence of ld. representative from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 02/02/2016.