ITO WARD-32(1)(1), MUMBAI V. DHARAM HASMUKHBHAI JAGDA, MUMBAI

ITA 446/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0476 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-03-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA No. 446/Mum/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 1 of 2 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘D’ BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President)] and Kuldip Singh (Judicial Member)] ITA No. 446/Mum/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Ward 32(1)(1) Mumbai. .......................... Appellant Vs. Dharam Hasmukhbhai Jadga ......................Respondent 154/155, Santvani Bldg, LIC Colony Besides Upadhya Dairy, Borivali (W), Mumbai 400092 [PAN: AGLPJ0431B] Appearances: Neha Thakur for the appellant M. Subramanian for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : January 03, 2022 Date of pronouncement : January 06, 2022 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, VP: 1. By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 31 st January 2020 passed by the learned CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. When this appeal was called out for hearing, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the present appeal of the Revenue needs to be dismissed on account of low tax effect in view of the recent CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 whereby the monetary limits for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal was enhanced from Rs.20 lakhs to Rs.50 lakhs. This instruction is applicable to the pending cases also. Therefore, the present appeal of the Revenue is liable to be dismissed as non-maintainable as held by this Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Dinesh Madhavlal Patel in ITA No.1398/Ahd/2004 for AY 1998-99 vide a consolidated order dated 14.08.2019. ITA No. 446/Mum/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 2 of 2 3. The learned Departmental Representative fairly admitted that the tax effects involved in this appeal is less than the limit prescribed by the aforesaid CBDT Circular. 4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of applicable legal position. As learned counsel rightly contends, this appeal of the Revenue is no longer maintainable in view of the recent CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. The mandatory limit for cases in which Revenue can challenge the relief granted by the CIT(A) now stands enhanced to Rs.50 lakhs. This concession granted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is retrospective in effect inasmuch as it applies to all pending appeals as well. In view of the above position, the appeal of the Revenue is no longer maintainable and must be dismissed as such. 5. It is, however, made clear that on re-verification at the end of the Assessing Officer it comes out that the tax effect of more than Rs.50 lakhs is being involved in the appeal or the appeal falls within the exemption clause of the Circular, then the Revenue will be at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application to recall the Tribunal order. The application should be filed within time limit prescribed in the Act. 6. In the result, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Pronounced in the open court today on the 06 th day of January 2022. Sd/- Sd/- Kuldip Singh Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Vice President) Mumbai, dated the 06 th day of January 2022. Copies to: (1) The Appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) Guard File By order True Copy Assistant Registrar/Sr.PS Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai benches, Mumbai