C I T JAIPUR vs. M/S GHEWER CHAND VINOD KUMAR J

PDF · subscribers
ITA/175/2005HC RajasthanRJHC02042631200530 November 20164 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal is dismissed as not pressed, in light of CBDT Circular dated 10.12.2015. The court noted that the tax effect in the instant case was less than Rs. 20 lac, which is the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Courts. The court accepted the respondent's submission that the issue was covered by the circular. 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 granted liberty to move an application for recalling the order if the appeal falls under any of the exceptions specified in the circular. The court also noted that the respondent had placed on record an order passed by the ITAT Jaipur Bench in Misc. Application No. 70/JP/2005 decided on 3rd August, 2005.

What were the facts?

The appellant, CIT Jaipur (Revenue), filed an appeal before the Rajasthan High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s. Ghewer Chand Vinod Kumar J. The appeal was filed for assessment years not specified in the judgment. The tax effect in dispute was stated to be less than Rs. 20 lac. The High Court noted that the respondent's counsel stated the issue was covered by a circular, and the court accepted this. The court also referred to Circular No. 21/2015 issued by the CBDT dated 10.12.2015, which revised monetary limits for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court given the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lac, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015? The Revenue's contention is not explicitly recorded. However, the appeal was filed, implying a belief in its maintainability or merit. The Revenue's argument, if any, would likely have been that the appeal should be heard on merits despite the tax effect, or that it falls under an exception to the circular. The Respondent's contention is that the issue is covered by the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which sets monetary limits for filing appeals. The respondent likely argued that since the tax effect is below the prescribed limit for High Court appeals (Rs. 20 lac), the appeal should not be entertained or should be dismissed as not pressed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B.INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 175 / 2005 C I T JAIPUR ----Appellant Versus M/S GHEWER CHAND VINOD KUMAR J ----Respondent __________________________________________ For Appellant : Mr. Anuroop Singhi For Respondent : Mr. P.K. Kasliwal __________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order 30/11/2016

Counsel for the respondent states that the issue is covered by the circular, we accept the same. 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. 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 (2 of 4 ) [ITA-175/2005] 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 :- 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.

(3 of 4 ) [ITA-175/2005]

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 on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.” 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. 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 appeals 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 appeal, if any, are left open to be examned 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. Accordingly, in the light of the CBDT Circular dated 10.12.2015 the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.

(4 of 4 ) [ITA-175/2005] Liberty to revive the case in case of difficulty. Even otherwise, counsel for the respondent has placed on record the order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Jaipur Bench in Misc Application No. 70/JP/2005 decided on 3rd August, 2005, which has been taken on record. (DINESH MEHTA)J. (K.S.JHAVERI)J. A.Sharma/63

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →