Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

A C I T - 19(3) Mathru Mandir Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 Vs. M/s. Vishal Diamonds 100A - Panchratna,Opera House, Mumbai 400004
September, 28th 2015
           IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                    "SMC" Bench, Mumbai

            Before Shri D. Manmohan, Vice President

                ITA Nos. 4543 & 4547/Mum/2015
               (Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2011-12)

A C I T - 19(3)                  M/s. Vishal Diamonds
Mathru Mandir                Vs. 100A - Panchratna,
Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007       Opera House, Mumbai 400004
                      PAN - AACFV0161D
           Appellant                      Respondent

                   Appellant by:  Shri Vishwas Jadhav
                   Respondent by: None

                   Date of Hearing:       24.09.2015
                   Date of Pronouncement: 24.09.2015

                              ORDER

Per D. Manmohan, V.P.

     These two appeals are filed at the instance of the Revenue and
they pertain to assessment years 2007-08 and 2011-12.






2.    None appeared on behalf of the assessee. The learned D.R.
submitted that the AO made an addition of `29,290/- in A.Y. 2007-08
and `1,22,096/- in A.Y. 2011-12 by estimating 20% of the purchase
as bogus and also disallowed the entire purchase cost whereas the
learned CIT(A) observed that the payments are made by account
payee cheques and therefore he directed the AO to disallow 12.5% of
the purchases made in respective years. The learned D.R. admitted
that the tax effect in each year is less than `1,00,000/-

3.    It is well settled, as per the CBDT Instruction No.5/2014 dated
10.07.2014, that the Revenue should not prefer an appeal if the tax
effect is below `4,00,000/- unless there are justifiable reasons which
are recorded in the authorisation memo. The learned D.R. admitted
that there is no such reason recorded in the instant case.
                                      2       ITA Nos. 4543 & 4347/Mum/2015
                                                         M/s. Vishal Diamonds

4.        Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I am of the
view that the appeals filed by the Revenue deserve to be dismissed
on the ground that the tax effect involved in each case is less than
`4,00,000/- and hence the appeals filed are in contravention to the
mandatory instruction issued by the CBDT, which is binding upon the
Revenue.






5.        In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24th September, 2015.

                                                      Sd/-
                                                (D. Manmohan)
                                                 Vice President

Mumbai, Dated: 24th September, 2015

Copy to:

     1.   The   Appellant
     2.   The   Respondent
     3.   The   CIT(A) ­ 29, Mumbai
     4.   The   CIT­ 18, Mumbai City
     5.   The   DR, "SMC" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai

                                                          By Order

//True Copy//
                                                  Assistant Registrar
                                          ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting