Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Dcit, New Delhi vs M/S. Magnum International Trading ... on 1 October, 2019
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH: 'E': NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No:- 2510/Del/2017
(Assessment Year: 2011-12)
The DCIT, Circle 16(1), M/s Magnum International
New Delhi Vs Trading Company Pvt. Ltd.,
48/12, Commercial Centre,
Malcha Marg, Chanakyapuri,
New Delhi
PAN-AAACM8173B
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Appellant by Shri. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Respondent by Shri. Anil Bhalla, C.A.
ORDER
PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM
[A]. This appeal has been filed by Revenue against the order dated 23.02.2017 passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-6, New Delhi [in short, "Ld.CIT(A)"] pertaining to assessment year 2011-12. In this appeal, the tax effect is less than the monetary limit fixed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (in short "CBDT") in its Circular No.17/2009 dated 08.08.2019. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance of claim of deduction of expenditure of Rs. 1,26,92,623/- u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by ignoring a finding of facts recorded by the ITA No: - 2510/Del/2017 Assessing Officer (the AO) that the assessee had not recognized revenue earned by it from its customer on sale of real estate during year under consideration on the ground that it was following percentage completion method, accordingly, the assessee was not entitled claim deduction of expenditure of real estate business?
2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance of claim of deduction of expenditure of Rs. 1,26,92,623/- u/s 37(1) of the Act by ignoring a fact that the assessee had not even disclosed basis of capitalizing a part of total expenditure and claiming deduction of another part of total expenditure under percentage completion method followed by the assessee?
3. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance of claim of deduction of expenditure of Rs. 1,26,92,623/- u/s 37(1) of the Act by accepting additional evidence even when the assessee had not fulfilled the condition as laid down under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 (the Rule) and without affording opportunity of being heard to the Assessing Officer (the AO)?
[B]. At the outset, it was brought to the notice by learned counsel for the Assessee, at the time of hearing that tax effect in this appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000./-. Vide recent CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with earlier CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, minimum threshold limit of tax effect of filing of appeals by Revenue in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT", for short) has been enhanced to Rs. 50,00,000/-. In a subsequent clarification issued by CBDT vide F.No. 279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ, dated 20/08/2019, it has been clarified by CBDT that the aforesaid revised monetary limit is also applicable to all pending appeals in ITAT. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, we are of the view that this appeal filed by Revenue is not maintainable. The learned Departmental Representative also did not press the appeal.
Page | 2 ITA No: - 2510/Del/2017 Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed being not pressed, and also not maintainable, having regard to aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 in the light of aforesaid clarification dated 20/08/2019. [C]. Before leaving, we clarify that Revenue will be at liberty to approach Income Tax Appellate Tribunal U/s 254(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking recall of this order and, for restoration of the appeal if it is found that this appeal of Revenue is not covered by aforesaid CBDT Circulars dated 08.08.2019 and 11.07.2018.
[D]. In the result, the appeal by Revenue is dismissed. Our decision was orally pronounced in the Open Court after conclusion of hearing on the date of hearing. Now, this written order is pronounced in Open Court on 01.10.2019.
Sd/- Sd/-
(AMIT SHUKLA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 01.10.2019
SH
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Page | 3
ITA No: - 2510/Del/2017
ITAT NEW DELHI
Draft dictated 30.09.2019
Draft placed before author
Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS
Order signed and pronounced on
File sent to the Bench Clerk
Date on which file goes to the AR
Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
Date of dispatch of Order.
Date of uploading on the website 01.10.2019 Page | 4