DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. PRADEEP KAINYA, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4079/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 December 2015AY 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 as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The circular stated that appeals with a tax effect of Rs. 10 lakhs and below should be withdrawn or not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the deletion of additions made on account of unexplained cash credit and unaccounted commission expenditure. The tax effect of the appeal was Rs. 4,54,621/-.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit is maintainable. The applicability of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 to pending appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravikiran, DR
Hearing: 15.12.2015Pronounced: 15.12.2015

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue on 21.5.2013 is against the order of the CIT (A)-39, Mumbai dated 6.3.2013 for the assessment year 2009-2010. 2. At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to the solitary ground raised by the Revenue relating to the deletion of additions (i) Rs. 12,73,825/- made u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credit and (ii) Rs. 63,690/- on account of unaccounted commission expenditure @ 5% for earning the same, and mentioned that the tax effect in this case is worked out to Rs. 4,54,621/-. Further, he brought our attention to the recently issued CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 and submitted that the appeals filed by the Revenue with a tax effect of Rs. 10 lakhs and below are to be either dismissed by the Tribunal as not maintainable or not pressed by the Revenue. Referring to the above mentioned Board Circular No.21/2015, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to para 10 and submitted that the said monetary limitation of Rs. 10 lakhs applies to all the appeals filed by the Revenue retrospectively. Considering the significance of the said para 10 of the CBDT Circular (supra) is extracted as under:-

“10. 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.”

3.

Considering the above, the appeal filed by the Revenue, wherein the tax effect is below the above stated tax limit of Rs. 10 lakhs, is dismissed as not maintainable.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 15th December, 2015. (AMARJIT SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक 15/12/2015 व.नन.स./ OKK , Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अऩीराथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A)- 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT 4. ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR,

5.

ITAT, Mumbai गार्ड पाईर / Guard file. 6. सत्मावऩत प्रनत ////

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →