No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
आदेश / O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order dated 29.09.2011 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai (hereinafter called as the CIT(A) ) for assessment year 2007-08. The revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:
1. “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.20,13,744/- u/s.14A
of the Act r.w.r 8D without appreciating that in the case of M/s. Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT(328 ITR 81) (Supra, their Lordhsip had upheld the contentions of the Union of India that Rule8D is reasonable in its nature.”
At the outset the ld. AR of the assessee pointed out that the tax effect in this appeal is below Rs.10.00 lakhs and further submitted that in view of the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 brought out by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the appeal was not maintainable and be dismissed. The ld. DR also agreed to the submission of the ld. AR.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
We find from the records before us that the tax involved in the disputed issue is below Rs.10 Lacs and therefore, in view of the circular no 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 no appeals should be filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal which has tax effect of Rs. 10.00 lacs or less and this circular is also applicable retrospectively to all pending appeals.
The relevant extract the said CBDT Circular (Supra) is as under:- “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 Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.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.”
Considering the above, the appeal filed by the Revenue, is therefore dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29th January, 2016 Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Rajesh Kumar) �या�यक सद�य / Judicial Member लेखा सद�य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated :29.01.2016 Ps. Ashwini आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT - concerned 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard File