C I T ALWAR vs. M/S LAKHANI SHOES CO PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/393/2011HC RajasthanRJHC02001870201102 February 20173 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the instant appeal, having a tax effect indisputably less than Rs. 20 lac, which is the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Courts as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, deserves to be dismissed as not pressed. The Court clarified that the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal, if any, are left open to be examined in an appropriate proceeding in the future. The Revenue was also granted liberty to move an application for recalling the order if the appeal fell under any of the exceptions specified in the circular. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not pressed in light of the CBDT Circular dated 10.12.2015. The judgment also noted that it would be open for the appellant to revive the appeal in case of difficulty.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar, filed an appeal before the Rajasthan High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The respondent is M/s Lakhani Shoes Co. Pvt. Ltd. The tax effect in the present appeal was stated to be less than Rs. 20 lac. The High Court noted that a CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 had been issued, which revised the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Revenue before various judicial forums, including the High Courts, with the objective of reducing litigation. The circular stipulated that appeals shall not be filed where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20,00,000/- before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, with a tax effect less than Rs. 20 lac, should be dismissed in light of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The Revenue contended that the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, provides revised monetary limits for filing appeals. Specifically, for appeals before the High Court, the monetary limit is Rs. 20,00,000/-. Since the tax effect in the instant case is less than this prescribed limit, the appeal should be dismissed. The Revenue did not argue any exceptions to the circular that might apply to this case. The Assessee did not make any arguments as the judgment is based on the circular and the tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.393/2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus M/S Lakhani Shoes Co. Pvt. Ltd., A-56-57, Industrial Area, Bhiwadi. ----Respondent _____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mrs. Parinitoo Jain _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment Per Hon’ble Jhaveri J. 02/02/2017 1. Instant appeal is directed against order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and indisputably the tax effect as brought to our notice, is less than Rs.20 lac.

2.

A Circular No.21/2015 has been issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 10.12.2015 in exercise of its power u/sec. 268A (1) of the Income-tax Act 1961 in supersession of the Boards instruction No.5/2014 dt.10.7.2014 regularising the monetary limits for filing the appeals by the Revenue before the Tribunal, High Courts and Apex Court with an object for reducing litigation. Relevant para nos.3, 8, 9 and 10 reads ad infra :- “3. Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder :-

(2 of 3) S. No. Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case. 4. xxx xxx xxx 5. xxx xxx xxx 6. xxx xxx xxx 7. xxx xxx xxx

8.

Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect: (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule are under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets/bank accounts.

9.

The monetary limits specified in para 3 above shall not apply to writ matters and direct tax matters other than Income tax. Filing of appeals in other Direct tax matters shall continue to be governed by relevant provisions of statute & rules. Further, filing of appeal in cases of Income Tax, where the tax effect is not quantifiable or not involved, such as the case of registration of trusts or institutions under section 12 A of the IT Act, 1961, shall not be governed by the limits specified in para 3 above and decision to file appeal in such cases may be taken on merits of a particular case.

10.

This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions

(3 of 3) on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”

3.

The extract of the paragraphs referred to supra, clearly indicates that the limits specified in para 3 may not apply to certain exceptions specified in para 8, at the same time para nos.9 and 10 of the Circular if read conjointly, clearly envisages that the present instructions will apply retrospectively to all the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/Tribunals, subject to exceptions where the tax effect even if is less than Rs.20 lac, can be preferred in High Courts.

4.

Taking note of the CBDT Circular dt. 10/12/2015 and the tax effect which indisputably in the instant case is less than Rs.20 lac, much less than what has been prescribed for filing appeal before the High Courts, deserves to be dismissed as not pressed. However, it is made clear that the substantial questions of law raised in the instant appeals, if any, are left open to be examined in an appropriate proceeding, if arises in future. At the same time we consider it appropriate to observe that if the appeal falls in any of the exceptions as referred to in the Circular dt. 10/12/2015, the Revenue will be at liberty to move an application for recalling of the order if so advised.

5.

Accordingly, in the light of the CBDT Circular dated 10.12.2015 the appeal stands dismissed as not pressed.

6.

However, it will be open for the appellant to revive the appeal in case of difficulty. (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR)J. (K.S. JHAVERI)J. Asheesh Kr. Yadav/124

More judgments on Section 268A(1)

All 190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →