TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT Mumbai dismisses revenue's appeal on bogus purchases, citing CBDT Circular.</h1> <h3>ITO-19 (3) (5), Versus Ushma Ketan Morakhia</h3> ITO-19 (3) (5), Versus Ushma Ketan Morakhia - TMI Issues:Appeal against deletion of addition on account of bogus purchases - Tax effect calculation for appeal validity.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed by the revenue against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 31,92,484 on account of bogus purchases (accommodation entries) for the assessment year 2007-08. The Assessing Officer had made the addition based on information received during search and seizure operations on the Mahasagar group, indicating that the assessee had taken accommodation entries. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, leading to the revenue's appeal before the ITAT Mumbai.2. The key contention revolved around the 'tax effect' involved in the appeal, as per the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The revenue argued that including surcharge, the tax effect exceeded the Rs. 10 lakh limit specified in the circular, making the appeal valid. However, the authorized representative for the assessee contended that excluding surcharge, the tax effect was below the limit, citing a coordinate bench's order supporting this interpretation.3. The ITAT Mumbai analyzed the tax effect calculation, excluding surcharge, and education cess. Referring to a previous case, the tribunal emphasized that for determining the tax effect under the CBDT Circular, surcharge and education cess should be excluded. As the tax effect in the present case fell below the Rs. 10 lakh threshold set by the circular, the ITAT held that the revenue's appeal was not maintainable.4. Ultimately, the ITAT Mumbai dismissed the revenue's appeal, concluding that the tax effect, when calculated excluding surcharge, was below the monetary limit specified in the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The decision was based on the interpretation that only the tax amount, without surcharge and education cess, should be considered for determining the appeal's validity under the circular.This detailed analysis highlights the core issues of the appeal, the arguments presented by both parties regarding the tax effect calculation, and the ITAT Mumbai's decision based on the interpretation of the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
