Huf India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax
- CitationITA No.5275/M/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal is not maintainable where the tax effect involved is below the monetary limit of Rs.3,00,000 prescribed by CBDT Instruction No.3 of 2011 dated 9 February 2011, and such an appeal is accordingly dismissed under section 268A of the Income Tax Act.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
DCIT, Circle - 3(1) M/s. HUF India Pvt. Ltd., Room No.607, 6th Floor, Gat No.432 to 434, Aayakar Bhavan, Medankarwadi, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Alandi Phata, Chakan, Tal. Khed, Pune - 410501. PAN: AABCH9173K (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Smt Deepa Khare, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Vijayumar Bora, D.R.
Date of Hearing : 16.02.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 16.02.2015
ORDER
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] dated 05.03.2013 relevant to assessment year 2009-10.
2. The dispute involved in the present case is relating to the deletion of addition of Rs17,100/- under section 43B read with section 36(1)(va) and 2(24)(x) being employee's contribution to PF paid after due date and further in respect of claim of expenditure of Rs.9 lakh under section 35D(2) of the Act.
3. Before us, learned AR of the assessee relying upon the Instruction No.3/2011 dated 09-02-2011 submitted that the tax effect in the appeal of the 2 ITA No.2090/M/2012 M/s. Wham Investments Pvt. Ltd.
Revenue is less than Rs.3 lacs, therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable.
4. Learned DR did not controvert to the submission made by the learned AR.
5. After hearing the learned representatives of both the parties, we find that as per CBDT Instruction no.3 of 2011, dated 9th February 2011, the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal can be filed by the Revenue, when the tax effect exceeds the monetary limit of Rs.3,00,000/-. Therefore the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed under section 268A of the income Tax Act.
6. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 16.02.2015.
Sd/- Sd/- (N.K. Billaiya) (Sanjay Garg) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated: 16.02.2015. * Kishore, Sr. P.S.
Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy// [
By Order
Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free