ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, CHHINDWARA vs. SHRI PADAM CHAND BHURA, CHHINDWARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 214/JAB/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur14 August 2020AY 2012-20133 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeal was not maintainable due to the low tax effect and dismissed it as withdrawn. The Tribunal also held that the assessee's cross-objection against the consequential order of the AO was not maintainable without first approaching the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The Revenue's counsel submitted that the tax effect was below the CBDT's monetary limit for appeals. The assessee filed a cross-objection regarding the Assessing Officer's incorrect implementation of the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the low tax effect. Whether a cross-objection against an AO's consequential order is maintainable before the ITAT without first approaching the CIT(A).

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI NRS GANESAN & SHRI SANJAY ARORA

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv
For Respondent: Shri I.B. Khandel,DR, Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv
Hearing: 14/08/2020Pronounced: 14/08/2020

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.214/JAB/2018
C.O.No.18/JAB/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER

Per NRS Ganesan, JM:

1.

This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-1, Jabalpur dated 13.07.2018. The assessee has filed cross objection against the very same order of the CIT(A), therefore we heard the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objection together and disposing of the same by this common order.

2.

When the appeal is taken up for hearing, Mr. I.B. Khandel, ld. D.R., very fairly submitted that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than the monetary limit fixed by the CBDT for filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Therefore, he submitted that the Department may be permitted to withdraw the appeal. We heard, Shri Sapan Usrethe, the ld. counsel for the assessee also. According to ld. counsel for the assessee, the AO while giving effect to the order of the ld. CIT(A) committed the mistake and it was not correctly given effect to the order of the CIT(A), therefore, he filed the cross objection.

3.

Having heard the ld. D.R. and the ld. counsel for the assessee, this Tribunal finds that in view of the Circular issued by the CBDT fixing the monetary limit for filing the appeal before this Tribunal, the appeal is not maintainable, therefore, the ld. D.R. has very fairly prayed for permission to withdraw the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal of the Department is dismissed as withdrawn.

4.

Coming to the cross objection of the assessee, the only grievance of the assessee appears to be that the AO has not give effect to the order of the CIT(A) correctly while passing the consequential order. The issue of passing a consequential order is a separate cause of action arising after the order of the ACIT Circle-Chhindwara Vs. ShriPadam Chand Bhura,Chhindwara (A.Y.2012-13)

CIT(A). Therefore, in case the AO has not given effect to the order of the CIT(A), as per the direction of the CIT(A), it is always open to the assessee to take up the matter on appeal before the CIT(A). This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the appeal/cross objection is not maintainable against the consequential order passed by the AO, without first approaching the CIT(A).

5.

With the above observation, the appeal of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed. (Order pronounced in the open court on August 14th , 2020.)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →