VINODBHAI PITHIYA,VADODARA V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VADODARA

CO 13/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara against Vinodbhai Pithiya, challenging the deletion of Rs. 1,49,19,923 by the CIT(A). The appeal was rendered infructuous due to the revised monetary limit for tax effect set by the CBDT Circular No. 9/2024, which raised the limit to Rs. 60 lakhs for appeals pending adjudication. The assessee's Cross Objection supported the CIT(A)'s findings but was dismissed as not pressed following the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 314310 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 09-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: CBDT Circular No. 9/2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TRUPTI PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: KINJAL SHAH
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.999/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vadodara Vs. Vinodbhai Pithiya, 404, Shantam Apartment Pasabhai Park, Gotri Road, Vadodara-390007 [PAN No.AIAPP8126E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) C.O. No.13/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Vinodbhai Pithiya, 404, Shantam Apartment Pasabhai Park, Gotri Road, Vadodara-390007 Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vadodara [PAN No.AIAPP8126E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Kinjal Shah, C.A. Respondent by: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 08.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.05.2025 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Department against the order passed by Ld. CIT(A), challenging the deletion of Rs. 1,49,19,923/-, in the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), Ahmedabad vide order dated 15.03.2024 passed for A.Y. 2016-17. 2. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that on perusal of Form No. 36, the tax effect indicated by the Income Tax Department is ITA No. 999/Ahd/2024 & C.O. No. 13/Ahd/2024 DCIT vs. Vinodbhai Pithiya and Vinodbhai Pithiya vs. DCIT Asst. Year –2016-17 - 2– 54,81,726/-. The Counsel for the assessee invited our attention to CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 dated 15.03.2024, in which the monetary limit of tax effect with respect to appeals filed by the Department was raised to Rs. 60 lakhs and the said Circular is applicable to appeals pending adjudication before the ITAT. Accordingly, in view of the revised monetary limit, it was submitted that the appeal filed by the Department has become infructuous and accordingly, the same is liable to be dismissed, on account of low tax effect. 3. The Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue did not dispute the above facts. However, he sought liberty be given to the Department to revive the above appeals in the event if the Tax Effect in the above appeals are higher than the prescribed monetary limit. 4. Considering the above submissions of both the parties, the above appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed, following the CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 with liberty to the Department to revive the appeals, in the event, if there is change in the disputed tax in the above appeals. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. 6. We further note that the assessee has filed Cross Objection No. 13/Ahd/2024, in which the assessee has only supported the findings given by Ld. CIT(A), in the appellate order. 7. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that in case the appeal of the Department is dismissed on account of low tax effect, then the assessee shall not pressing its contention raised in the Cross Objections. ITA No. 999/Ahd/2024 & C.O. No. 13/Ahd/2024 DCIT vs. Vinodbhai Pithiya and Vinodbhai Pithiya vs. DCIT Asst. Year –2016-17 - 3– 8. Since we have dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on account of low tax effect (though liberty has been given to the Department to revive the above appeal in case the tax effect in the above appeal is found to be higher), the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is being dismissed as not pressed. 9. In the result, both the appeals filed by the Department as well as the Cross Objections filed by the assessee, are dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 09/05/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 09/05/2025 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 08.05.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 08.05.2025 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S 09.05.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .05.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 09.05.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 09.05.2025 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… "