Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The ITO 9 (1) (4) Mumbai Versus M/s. Fobeoz India P Ltd.

2015 (9) TMI 597 - ITAT MUMBAI

Disallowance deleted by CIT(A) - CIT(A) deleting the addition of excess provision written back by the assessee in the profit and loss account and not offered for tax in this year - Monetary limits for the Revenue to file appeals - Held that:- Considering proposition laid down by the hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Vijaya V. Kavekar [2013 (2) TMI 451 - Bombay High Court] we hold that in view of the revised Instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under which, the mone .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

als filed by the Revenue because of small tax effect.- Decided against revenue - ITA No.6469/Mum/2013 - Dated:- 10-6-2015 - Shri R.C. Sharma and Ms. Sushma Chowla, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri P K Birla For the Respondent : Smt Champa Purohit ORDER Ms. Sushma Chowla (Judicial Member).- The present appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated August 30, 2013, relating to the assessment year 2010-11, against the order passed under section 143( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Assessing Officer ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was right in deleting the addition of excess provision written back by the assessee in the profit and loss account and not offered for tax in this year, without appreciating the fact that the assessee, during the assessment proceedings, had not contended that this amount was not allowed as deduction in the earlier year?" 3. The learned authorised .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder of the Assessing Officer. 5. We have heard the rival parties and perused the records. 5.1. On perusal of the record, we find that the present appeal is filed by the Revenue and the total tax effect in the present appeal is below ₹ 4 lakhs. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue fairly admitted that the tax effect in the present appeal was less than ₹ 4 lakhs. 5.2. We find that the issue in the present appeals is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by the hon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

urts and the Supreme Court. The Central Board of Direct Taxes from time to time, issues instructions fixing the monetary limits with the object of not burdening the courts and the Tribunal with matters where the tax effect was on a lower side. The Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Instruction No. 5 of 2014 issued on July 10, 2014 had revised the earlier Instruction No. 3 of 2011, dated February 9, 2011 wherein, the monetary limits and other conditions for filing the Departmental appeals in Inco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

,000 2. Under section 260A before the High Court 10,00,000 3. Before the Supreme Court 25,00,000 5.4. The revised monetary limit for filing the appeals before the Appellate Tribunal was fixed at in excess of ₹ 4 lakhs. Further, under the said Instruction, it was also directed that the Assessing Officer shall calculate the tax effect separately for every assessment year in respect of the disputed issues. In the case of every assessee where, the disputed issue arises in more than one assessm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ds the monetary limit prescribed then, such appeals could also be filed in respect of all such assessment years even if the tax effect is less than prescribed monetary limits. 5.5. In the facts of the present case, the Revenue had filed the appeal on November 1, 2013. Admittedly, in the year under appeal, the tax effect is less than ₹ 4 lakhs as prescribed in Instruction No. 5 of 2014 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. At the time of hearing of the appeal, the monetary limits pre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to the new cases to be filed by the Revenue after the date of issue of the Instructions. 5.6. We find that the said issue has been considered by the hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Vijaya V. Kavekar [2013] 350 ITR 237 (Bom). The hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Vijaya V. Kavekar (supra), had in turn followed the ratio laid down by another Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Polycott Corporation [2009] 318 ITR 144 (Bom) wherein, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Income-tax Act. What the court has to consider is the plain language of the paragraph and the object behind the said provisions. The object appears to be not to burden courts and the Tribunals in respect of matters where the tax effect is less than the limit prescribed. Even before this Instruction, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has been issuing instructions, the last one being on October 24, 2005 where the monetary limit has been fixed. In those instructions the only exception had been .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty is cast on the Assessing Officer that even if the disputed questions arise for more than one assessment year then an appeal should be filed only in respect of those years where the monetary limit as specified in paragraph 3 of the instructions. The exception, however, is carved out in respect of a composite order of the High Court or the appellate authority. In other words where the High Court or the Tribunal has passed a composite order in respect of the same assessee on the same question an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n issues". The expression, therefore, of a composite order will have to be read to mean an order in respect of the same assessee for more than one year. An (order) disposing of several appeals on a common question of law by the appellate authority, cannot be said to be a composite order as the order involves appeals by different persons, which appeals for the sake of convenience have been only clubbed together for the purpose of disposal on that issue. In our opinion, this would be the corr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version