ASST CIT (TDS) 2(2), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL LIFE SCIENCES LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2449/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 January 2016AY 2009-102 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals to the ITAT as per CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015. This circular was applicable retrospectively.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) and consequential interest. The disputed amount was ₹6,05,170, with a tax effect below the monetary limit for appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars. The applicability of CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015 to pending appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 201(1),Section 201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep GosainSmt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvdedi

For Appellant: Shri Prakesh Ojha
For Respondent: Shri Ronak G. Doshi
Hearing: 18.01.2016Pronounced: 18.01.2016

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.01.2014 passed by the CIT(A)-13, Mumbai in respect of order under section 201 r.w.s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for A.Y. 2009-10, on the following grounds: - “

(i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the amount of non/short deduction determined u/s 201(1) r.w.s 40(a0(ia) and consequential interest u/s 201(1A) by holding that no taxes required to be deducted on expenditure disallowed without appreciating that the AO has determined the short/non deduction by discussing at length various issues in the order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 40(a)(ia). (ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the interest demand without properly appreciating the factual & legal matrix of the case as clearly brought out by the A.O. in order u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

2. At the outset, it is noticed that, the disputed issue of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 201(1) of the Act is only for `6,05,170/- and the 2 M/s. Piramal Life Sciences Ltd. tax effect on this amount is below the monetary limit of `10 lakhs. As per the latest CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, dated 10th December, 2015, new guidelines of monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Department has been issued, whereby the tax effect for filing of appeal before the ITAT has been prescribed at `10 lakhs. In the said circular, it has been specially clarified that the said instruction will apply retrospectively to all the pending appeals. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable and is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th January, 2016. Sd/- Sd/- (Sandeep Gosain) (Jason P. Boaz) Judicial Member Accountant Member

Mumbai, Dated: 18th January, 2016

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →