ITAT Mumbai Judgments — August 2018

The Tribunal held that the provision for slow and non-moving stock was justified as the assessee's products are prone to evaporation and damage, and the stock was written off due to expiry or damage. The CIT(A)'s order was affirmed.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) correctly confirmed the addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- as share application money. The decision was based on the categorical statements of the person who provided accommodation entries and the lack of evidence from the assessee to prove the genuineness of the transactions.

The Tribunal held that the tax effect in all the appeals was below the threshold limit of Rs. 20 Lacs as per CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. Therefore, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.

The Tribunal held that the tax effect in all the appeals was below the threshold limit of Rs. 20 Lacs as per CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. Therefore, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.

The Tribunal held that the tax effect in all the appeals was below the threshold limit of Rs. 20 Lacs as per CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. Therefore, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.

The Tribunal held that the tax effect in all the appeals was below the threshold limit of Rs. 20 Lacs as per CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. Therefore, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine because the tax effect was below the threshold stipulated in the CBDT circular and the issues did not appear to fall under any exceptions. The revenue was granted liberty to file a miscellaneous application if exceptions were applicable.

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and the issues did not fall under any exceptions. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move for recall if exceptions applied.

The Tribunal upheld the revenue authorities' action, stating that the assessee failed to discharge its onus by not providing contracts to prove vehicles were operated by contractors. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was granted liberty to file a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move for recall if exceptions applied.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move for recall if exceptions applied.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was granted liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal noted that the appeal's tax effect was below the monetary limit specified in the CBDT circular. The Revenue did not provide any justification for the appeal falling under the exceptions mentioned in the circular.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was granted liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was granted liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was granted liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions in the circular.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal held that the appeals were covered by the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. Since the tax effect was below the prescribed limit and no exceptions applied, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and the issues did not fall under any exceptions. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed.

The Tribunal, considering the CBDT circular and the concession from the Departmental Representative, dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not maintainable. The appeal was found to be below the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and the issues did not fall under any exceptions. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed.

The Tribunal noted that the appeal's tax effect was below the revised monetary limit specified by the CBDT circular. As no exceptions were cited, the appeal was not pressed.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals in limine as the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The revenue was given liberty to move a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.

The Tribunal held that as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, departmental appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 20 lakhs should not be filed or pressed. The present appeal was not covered by any exceptions.

The Tribunal held that the appeals were covered by the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. Since the tax effect was below the prescribed limit and no exceptions applied, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the appeal's tax effect was below the revised monetary limit. As the Revenue did not provide any material to show exceptions applied, the appeal was deemed not pressed.

The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeals were below the prescribed monetary limit and did not fall under any exceptions. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal held that the appeals were covered by the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. Since the tax effect was below the prescribed limit and no exceptions applied, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal restored the issue of professional charges to the Assessing Officer for re-examination, considering the feasibility report and case laws. For other expenses, the Tribunal restricted the disallowance to 10% for certain categories and sustained the disallowance for travelling expenses at 5%.

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the revised monetary limit for appeals. Since no exceptions were cited, the appeal was deemed not pressed.

The Tribunal held that the appeals were covered by the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. Since the tax effect was below the prescribed limit and no exceptions applied, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the appeal's tax effect was below the revised monetary limit specified by the CBDT. As no exceptions applied, the appeal was deemed withdrawn.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn/not pressed, stating that its filing was not in consonance with the CBDT circular. The Revenue can approach for recall if exceptions apply.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn/not pressed, stating that their filing was not in consonance with the CBDT circular. The Revenue can approach the Tribunal for recall if exceptions apply.

The Tribunal held that the subscription revenue received by the assessee from Indian customers was in the nature of royalty. It also upheld the DRP's decision to delete interest under Section 234B, following a High Court ruling.

The Tribunal held that the appeals were covered by the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. Since the tax effect was below the prescribed limit and no exceptions applied, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not in consonance with the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn/not pressed, stating that their filing was not in consonance with the CBDT circular. The Revenue can approach the Tribunal for recall if exceptions apply.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn/not pressed, as its filing was not in consonance with the CBDT circular. The assessee's cross objection was also dismissed as academic.

The Tribunal, applying the CBDT circular, deemed the appeal withdrawn/not pressed as its filing did not meet the revised monetary criteria and no exceptions were cited. The Revenue retains the liberty to seek recall if exceptions apply.

The Tribunal held that since the quantum of the assessment had already been deleted in a prior appeal, the penalty arising from that assessment was not sustainable.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as withdrawn/not pressed due to non-compliance with the CBDT circular's monetary limit. Consequently, the assessee's cross-objection was also dismissed as academic.

The Tribunal noted that the appeal's tax effect was below the revised monetary limit for appeals. As no exceptions were cited, the Tribunal considered the appeal not in consonance with the CBDT circular.