ACIT 25(2), MUMBAI vs. PRITI R. JAGGI, MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection. This was based on the CBDT's circular setting monetary limits for filing appeals, as the total demand in this case was below the prescribed limit.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, and the assessee filed a cross-objection. The appeal concerned various disallowances made by the Assessing Officer, including commission expenses, payments to a travel agency, interest, and foreign travel expenses.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed based on the CBDT's monetary limits for filing appeals, and the merits of various disallowances made by the Assessing Officer.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
O R D E R
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee are directed against the very same order of the Ld. CIT(A)-35, Mumbai dated 29.11.2011.
2. The grounds raised by the Revenue read as under:
(1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Id.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of commission expenses u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee has credited the commission on 30.06.2007 whereas the provisions of the section 194H of the Act have been amended w.e.f. 01.06.2007.
(2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Id.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition partly made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of payment made to M/s.Reliable Travels and Cargo Pvt. Ltd. for non-deduction of TDS without appreciating the fact that the payment made to M/s.Reliable Travels and Cargo Pvt. Ltd. is in the nature of contract payment and duly covered as per provisions of section 194C of the Act.
(3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of interest for non-deduction of TDS without appreciating the fact that the provisions of section 194A(3) of the Act are in the nature of statutory obligation on the part of the assessee.
(4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance out of foreign travelling expenses without appreciating the fact that the assessee incurred these expenses on the family members of employees of ONGC which is not allowable.
3. Before going into the merits of the case, let us first consider CBDT’s latest instructions vide Circular No.21/2015 dated 10/12/2015, the relevant portion of which read as under:-
“ Circular No. 21/2015 F No 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt)
New Delhi the 10th December, 2015
Subject: Revision of monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before Supreme Court - measures for reducing litigation - Reg –
Reference is invited to Board's instruction No 5/2014 dated 10.07.2014 wherein monetary limits and other conditions for filing departmental appeals (in Income-tax matters) before Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court were specified.
In supersession of the above instruction, it has been decided by the Board that departmental appeals may be filed on merits before Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court keeping in view the monetary limits and conditions specified below.
Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: -
S. Appeals in Income-tax Monetary Limit No matters (in Rs) 1. Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2. Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3. Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/-
It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.”
In the case in hand, the total demand as per CIT(A)’s order is less than the amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-,which is below the monetary limits as
Since the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed the Cross objection filed by the assessee become otiose.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- J.M.Swamy vs. Government Of INDIAKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Acc LTD. vs. Secy.Industries Deptt.Orissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Kumaran Transports (Tuticorin) Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner Madras · 16 Oct 2026