JTCIT 19(2), MUMBAI vs. KUMAR RASIKLAL MEHTA, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2055/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 December 2015AY 2010-113 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 tax effect of the appeal was below the threshold limit prescribed by the Board's circular. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the assessment year 2010-11. The dispute was about treating capital gains as short-term instead of long-term.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal was maintainable given its low tax effect as per the Board's instructions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM

For Appellant: Shri B. S. Bist, Shri R. K. Sinha
For Respondent: Shri R. K. Sinha

सुनवाई क� तार�ख / : 16.11.2015 Date of Hearing Date of Order : 03.12.2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This is an Appeal by the Revenue directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 12.01.2015, partly allowing the Assessee’s appeal contesting its assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2010-11 vide order dated 09.3.2013.

(A.Y. 2010-11) Jt. CIT vs. Kumar Rasiklal Mehta 2. At the very outset, it was submitted by the ld. Authorized Representative (AR), the assessee’s counsel, that the tax-effect of the instant appeal filed on 08.9.2015, is much below the threshold monetary limit in its respect as prescribed by the Board vide Circular issued u/s.268A of the Act, i.e., Rs.4 lacs, adducing a copy of the relevant Board Instruction (No. 5 of 2014 dated 10.4.2014), applicable to the appeals by the Revenue filed on or after July 10, 2014. This, it was further explained by him, is on the issue in dispute being the assessment of the impugned capital gain (Rs.9.15 lacs) as short-term capital gain as against long-term capital gain returned by the assessee, and which entails a tax difference of 20%. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR) fairly conceded to this being the obtaining factual position.

3.

The parties were heard, and the material on record perused. As confirmed from the assessment order, the impugned order and the grounds of appeal, the issue arising in appeal is in conformity with that stated by the ld. AR. The tax-effect is accordingly below Rs.4 lacs. Further, the appeal does not fall in any of the exceptions specified at para 8 of the Board Instruction supra. The instant appeal is, accordingly, not maintainable u/s.268A of the Act r/w Board Instruction issued in pursuance thereof and, rather, ought not to have been filed by the Revenue, even as stated in the Instruction itself. The same is, accordingly, dismissed as not maintainable.

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →