ITO, WARD-2(1), BIKANER vs. M/S. R.K. CONSTRUCTION & EARTH MOVERS, BIKANER.

PDF · subscribers
ITA 274/JODH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur19 July 2018AY 2011-122 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 noted that the tax effect of the deleted addition was below Rs. 20 lacs. Therefore, in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, the appeal was dismissed on the ground of low tax effect.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 13,80,836/- made under Section 40(a)(ai). The addition was related to disallowance for non-deduction of TDS.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition under Section 40(a)(ai) and the retrospective/prospective applicability of the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ai).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ai),Section 201(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH (SMC

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA

Hearing: 19/07/2018

PER: R.C. SHARMA, AM

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the

CIT(A), Bikaner dated 22/03/2018 for the A.Y. 2011-12 in the matter

of order u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. The grounds raised by the

revenue in appeal are reproduced as under:

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 13,80,836/- by holding that the AO was not justified in making disallowance us/ 40(a)(ai) as the appellant has submitted certified u/s 201(1) of the IT Act and as to whether in such circumstances the second proviso inserted to section 40(a)(ai) is prospective/retrospective.”

2.

I have gone through the orders of authorities below and found that tax

effect in respect of additions deleted by CIT(A) is below Rs. 20 lacs, accordingly

in term of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 this appeal deserves to be

dismissed on the ground of low tax effect.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/07/2018.

Sd/- [R.C. SHARMA] Accountant Member Dated : 19 /07/2018 A/N Copy to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard File (ITA No. 274/Jodh/2018) Assistant Registrar Jodhpur Bench

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →