ITO (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. ASHUTOSH MOHANLAL SHAH, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5425/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 December 2015AY 2008-094 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 Revenue's appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit set by the CBDT. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on this ground.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the First Appellate Authority regarding tax credit claimed by the assessee. The assessee's counsel raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal due to low tax effect.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT instructions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Ms. Vinita J. Menon, Shri Mehul Shah
Hearing: 15/12/2015

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 23/05/2013 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, on the ground in holding that the tax credit claimed by the assessee u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act) cannot be denied merely for the reason that the assessee has claimed the credit under wrong hand of payment ignoring certain facts as has been mentioned in the grounds of appeal.

2.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee Shri Mehul Shah, contended that the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable as the tax effect is below prescribed monetary limit. This factual matrix was not controverted by Ms. Vinita J. Menon, ld. DR.

1.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We note that the total income computed by the Assessing Officer is Rs.13,79,680/-, therefore, the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed monetary limit. This factual matrix was consented to be correct by ld. DR, therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable.

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.3/2011 dated 09/02/2011, further instruction No.5/2014 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT) dated 10/07/2014. The CBDT revised the monetary limit for filing the appeal before various Authorities/Courts vide CBDT Circular No.21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT), with retrospective effect, advised/directed the Department not to file appeal in the cases where the tax effect does not exceed the following monetary limits. The revised monetary limit is as under:-

Sl. Appeals in Income –tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) No. 1. Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2. U/s 260 A before High Court 20,00,000/- 3. Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/-

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 the above, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable.

Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

This order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of the ld. representative from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 15/12/2015

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →