ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. SHALIMAR LAKECITY PVT LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 9103/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2023AY 2011-123 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 due to low tax effect, as it did not meet the monetary threshold set by the CBDT circulars. The appeal was dismissed on this technical ground.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which had granted relief to the assessee. The tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal was maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit set by CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not Applicable

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI & SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Agarwal, Adv

For Respondent: Ms. Sunita Verma, CIT-D.R

Hearing: 25.05.2023Pronounced: 25.05.2023

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 24.09.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2011-12.

Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. “Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law Rs.42,85,058/- the Ld. CIT(A) was legally justified in holding that documents relied upon by the AO in the assessment leading to the addition of Rs. 1,29,00,000/- towards unsecured loans from bogus/shell companies/entities engaged in illegal business of providing accommodation entries, punishable under various provision of IPC are not incriminating in nature? In doing so, the Ld. CIT(A) has ignored the fact that network, documentation and web of layered: companies in the illegal business of providing accommodation entries is well organized throughout MCA and Income Tax Department before various AOs and any finding of information leading to such illegal bogus companies is truly

Page 2 of 4 incriminating in nature. Further, the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) leads to legitimizing of accommodation entries routed illegally violating various provisions of IPC. 2. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law on facts. 3. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.

4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

3. At the time of hearing Learned AR submitted that the tax effect in the present appeal of Revenue is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT for filing the appeal and therefore the appeal of Revenue needs to be dismissed.

Learned DR on the other hand did not controvert the factual submissions made by Learned AR but however supported the order of AO.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On perusing the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue, we find that Revenue is aggrieved by the order of Learned CIT(A) in respect of the relief given by him. We find that CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 had increased the limit for filing appeal before ITAT at Rs. 20 lakhs. The limit for filing the appeal before ITAT and other authorities were enhanced by CBDT vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. As per the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019, no Department appeal is to be filed against relief given by the Learned CIT(A) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal unless the tax effect, excluding interest, exceeds Rs.50 lakhs. We find that in Page 3 of 4 the present case, the tax effect involved is less than Rs.50 lakhs. In the absence of any material placed on record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the issue in the present appeal is covered by exceptions provided in para 10 of the aforesaid CBDT Circular of 11.07.2018, we are of the view that the monetary limit prescribed by the instructions of the CDBT Circular dated 08.08.2019 would be applicable to the present appeal of the Department. We therefore hold the present appeal of Revenue to be not maintainable on account of low tax effect. However, in case there is any error in the computation of the tax effect involved or if for any reason, the aforesaid CBDT Circular is not applicable, it would be open to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal. Thus the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25.05.2023

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →