What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the tax effect in the Department's appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. Consequently, the Department's appeal was dismissed as infructuous.

The Department appealed the deletion of an addition of Rs. 87,50,000 made on account of unproven cash deposits during demonetization. However, the Assessing Officer later revised the assessee's income, granting significant relief.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Department's appeal should be dismissed due to a low tax effect, rendering it infructuous based on CBDT circulars.

ACIT vs Shri Shiv Shanker Singh | ITAT Lucknow 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA & SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R, Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate

Department against the order dated 23.09.2020 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Lucknow [herein referred to as ‘CIT(A)] for Assessment Year 2017-18.

& C.O. No.04/LKW/2021 Page 2 of 4 2. C.O. No.04/LKW/2021 has been preferred by the assessee.

The sole issue raised by the Department, challenging the order of the ld. CIT(A), is the deletion of addition of Rs.87,50,0000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of failure of the assessee to prove the genuineness of cash deposits during demonetization period.

At the outset, the ld. authorized representative for the assessee submitted that the amount of deletion of addition of Rs.87,50,000/- mentioned in the grounds of appeal

of the Department is incorrect, as the ACIT, Range – 1, Lucknow - New vide his order dated 7.1.2021 (copy placed at pages 1 & 2 of the paper book) has revised the income of the assessee after appeal effect at Rs.44,48,140/- by granting a relief of Rs.1,34,84,540/-. He submitted that in view of the revised order dated 7.1.2021 of the ACIT, Range – 1, Lucknow – New, the tax effect involved in the appeal is below Rs.50,00,000/- and, therefore, in view of the CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 8.8.2019, the appeal of the Revenue is liable to be dismissed.

5. On a query from the Bench, the ld. Sr. D.R. fairly accepted that the averment of the ld. authorized representative for the assessee regarding the tax effect was correct and, therefore, the present Departmental Appeal would not survive in view of the monetary limit & C.O. No.04/LKW/2021 Page 3 of 4 prescribed by the CBDT for filing of appeals by the Department before the ITAT, which is presently at Rs.50.00 lakhs or more.

Having gone through the records and in view of the fact that the tax effect in the captioned Departmental Appeal is less then Rs.50.00 lakh, we are of the considered view that the Departmental Appeal is infructuous and is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal of the Department stands dismissed.

As far as the CO of the assessee is concerned, the grounds raised

by the assessee are in support of the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since we have already dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on ground of low tax effect, the Cross Objection of the assessee, supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A), has become infructuous and hence the same is dismissed as infructuous.

8. In the final result, the Appeal of the Department as well as the CO of the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/09/2024.

ACIT, RANGE-1, LUCKNOW vs. SHRI SHIV SHANKER SINGH, LUCKNOW

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments