Loading ITAT cases…
609 orders · Page 13 of 13
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of both additions. For the first ground, it was covered by a prior ITAT decision in the assessee's favor. For the second ground, the Tribunal found that the CIT(A) correctly concluded that the addition was based on a clerical error and unreliable material, ignoring the audited accounts.
The Tribunal held that CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, mandates that appeals should not be filed if the tax effect is below Rs. 10,00,000/-. This instruction applies retrospectively to pending appeals.
The Tribunal held that the Revenue should not have filed the appeal given the low tax effect and the binding instructions from the CBDT. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed without going into the merits of the case.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, which mandates not filing appeals where the tax effect is below a certain monetary limit. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue should have either not filed or withdrawn the appeal.
The Tribunal held that the department ought not to have filed the appeal given the low tax effect, as per Section 268A of the Income Tax Act and the relevant CBDT circular. The appeal was dismissed without going into the merits of the case.
The Tribunal held that CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, mandates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10,00,000/- should not be filed or should be withdrawn. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on this ground.
The Tribunal, following its own order for a previous assessment year and a High Court judgment, held that the assessee's activity of producing customized electronic data qualified for deduction under Section 10B. The Tribunal allowed the grounds of appeal.
The Tribunal held that the department should not have filed the appeal given the low tax effect and the binding nature of CBDT instructions under Section 268A. The assessee's cross-objection was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeals. Following relevant rules and judicial precedents, the appeals were treated as un-admitted.