Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)
At the time of hearing, the Ld A.R pointed out that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than the monetary limit of Rs.50.00 lakhs prescribed by CBDT for filing appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld D.R, on the contrary, submitted that the present appeal will be covered by the exception provided in the Circular as amended by Circular dated 20th August, 2018. He submitted that clause (e) of paragraph 10 (as amended) shall apply to the facts of present case and the said clause (e) reads as under:-
“(e) where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI/ED/DRI/ SFIO/Director General of GST intelligence (DGGI).”
Ld A.R, however, submitted that the information about M/s Bhanwarlal Jain group has not been received by the assessing officer from any external sources, i.e., it was furnished by the investigation wing of the income tax department only. Accordingly, the Ld A.R submitted that clause (e), referred above, would not apply to the facts of the present case. He further placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the division bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Amarchand P Shah (2019)(111 com 385)(Mum) in support of his contentions.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
