DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY (GITS), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1030/JPR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 October 2019AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the department were not maintainable as the tax effect did not exceed the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT. The department was granted liberty to file a miscellaneous application if the tax effect was found to be higher.

What were the facts?

The Department filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2011-12 and 12-13. The tax effect in these appeals was below the revised monetary limit for filing appeals by the department.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the department's appeals before the ITAT due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit specified by CBDT circulars.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH ‘B’, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1029 & 1030/JP/2016

Hearing: 10.10.2019Pronounced: 14.10.2019

• 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. If, in the case of an assessee, the disputed issues arise in more than one assessment year, appeal can be filed in respect of such assessment year or years in which the tax effect in respect of the disputed issues exceeds the monetary limit. No appeal shall be filed in respect of an assessment year or years in which the tax effect is less than the monetary limit. • Further, even in the case of composite order of any High Court or appellate authority which involves• more than one assessment year and common issues in more than one assessment year, no appeal shall be filed in respect of an assessment year or years in which the tax effect is less than the monetary limit. • In case where a composite order/ judgement involves more than one assessee, each assessee shall be• dealt with separately.”

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →