DCIT-CC-1(3), NAGPUR, NAGPUR V. MOR ALLOYS PVT. LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 233/NAG/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue appealing against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 3, Nagpur, which had deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) regarding undisclosed income from suppression of sales amounting to Rs.70,15,311 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that during survey proceedings, the director of Mor Alloys Pvt. Ltd. admitted to the suppression of sales and handling of cash sales. However, the CIT(A) found no merit in the A.O.'s additions, leading to the Revenue's appeal. The tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the monetary limit set by the CBDT Circular, which applies to all pending appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24219 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 22-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 21-07-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDIPKUMAR SALUNKE
• Assessee Lawyers: MANOJ G. MORYANI
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.233/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2021–22) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle–1(3), Nagpur ……………. Appellant v/s Mor Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 7–8–10, Flat no.103, Vinaygar South Garden, Harbar Park Road Pandurangpuram 530 003 PAN – AAGCM3029C ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 22/10/2024 Date of Order – 25/10/2024 O R D E R PER BENCH The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the impugned order dated 30/05/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2011–12. 2. In its appeal, the Revenue has raised following grounds:– “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the A.O. on account of undisclosed income u/s. 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of suppression of sales amounting to Rs.70,15,311/-. 2 Mor Alloys Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.233/Nag./2023 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the A.O. on account of undisclosed income u/s 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of suppression of sales amounting to Rs.70,15,311/- without appreciating the facts that during survey proceedings, Mr. Ashfaque Ahmed, Director of Mor Alloys Pvt., Ltd., in his statement had accepted rate negotiation of off grade Silico Manganese with commission agent Shri Suresh Kakani in whatsapp chat received and also accepted that cash generated by sale of Off-grade Silico Manganese has been handed over to Shri Manvendra Mor, Director of the Company. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the finding given by the AO on page No. 4 & 5 of the assessment order that in the statement of commission agent Shri Suresh Kankani recorded by DDIT (Inv.), Unit-II(3), Hyderabad, Shri Kankani has explained the mode of operation of the sequence of receipt of cash and payment of cash as directed by director Shri Manvendra Mor. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the ground realities and and erred in directing the addition made by the Α.Ο. 3. At the outset, the leaned Authorised Representative appearing for the assessee submitted that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue is below the revised monetary limit of ` 60 lakh applicable to appeals before the Tribunal, as per CBDT Circular no.09 of 2024, dated 17/09/2024. Thus, the learned A.R. submitted that the Revenue’s appeals being covered under the aforesaid Circular are not maintainable. 4. The learned Departmental Representative agreed that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue is below the monetary limit of ` 60 lakh for both the years under consideration. 5. Having heard the arguments of rival parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below, we are of the view that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue in the present appeal is below the revised monetary limit of ` 60 lakh as per 3 Mor Alloys Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.233/Nag./2023 CBDT Circular cited supra. It also stands clarified by the CBDT that the revised monetary limit of ` 60 lakh, as per the aforesaid CBDT Circulars, would also apply to all pending appeals. In view of the aforesaid, Revenue’s appeals deserve to be dismissed. However, the Revenue is given liberty to seek recall of this order if, at a later point of time, it is found that the appeal fall under any of the exceptions provided in the CBDT Circular referred to above. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/10/2024 Sd/- K.M. ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 25/10/2024 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "