AI Insights
The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-12, New Delhi, which pertained to the Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue challenged the partial deletion of an addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, which amounted to Rs. 1,36,67,500. The main grievances included the alleged error in deleting part of the addition concerning unsecured loans, the non-adjudication of a specific category of loans, and the allowance of peak credit in the addition of Rs. 43,74,500. However, the appeal was dismissed due to the low tax effect, which was below the threshold of Rs. 50 lakhs as specified in the CBDT circular.
Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129193 (ITAT-DELHI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
29-08-2023
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
G
Next Hearing Date
29-08-2023
Assessment Year
2013-2014
Appeal Filed On
05-01-2021
Judgement Text
ITA No.- 7/Del/2021 Ravi Kumar Vaid. Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘H’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No:- 7/Del/2021 ( Assessment Year: 2013-14) Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(1), New Delhi. Vs. Shri. Ravi Kumar Vaid, 418, 1 st Floor, Neemri colony, Phase-IV, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi. PAN No: AKUPV6695E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Assessee by : None Date of Hearing : 30.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 30.08.2023 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM This appeal by the Revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-12, New Delhi, dated 31.07.2020 pertaining to AY 2013-14. The Grievance of the Revenue reads as under: “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the part addition, made u/s 68 of the Act, ignoring the fact that the nature of the transaction of unsecured loans are accommodation entries. ITA No.- 7/Del/2021 Ravi Kumar Vaid. Page 2 of 4 (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating the second category i.e. square up loan out of the three ategory made by Ld. CIT(A) in the addition made u/s 68 of the Act. (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the Peak Credit in the addition of Rs. 43,74,500/- ignoring the fact that every cash deposit are not previous withdrawal and cash book does not authenticate the same.” 2. A perusal of the Assessment Order shows that the AO has made addition under Section 68 of the Act at Rs. 1,36,67,500/-. The Revenue is aggrieved by the partial deletion of this addition. 3. It can be seen that the tax effect on the entire addition would be less than Rs. 50 lakhs. Therefore, this appeal by the Revenue is not maintainable in the light of the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 4. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30.08.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) (N.K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 30/08/2023. Pooja/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ITA No.- 7/Del/2021 Ravi Kumar Vaid. Page 3 of 4 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI
Mehul