C I T vs. SARAF CARPET TEXTILES

PDF · subscribers
ITA/462/2009HC RajasthanRJHC02016236200930 August 20163 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable before it, as the tax effect was less than Rs. 20 lac, which is the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 for filing appeals before High Courts. The court observed that the circular applies retrospectively to pending appeals. Therefore, the appeal was 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 future proceedings. It also granted liberty to the Revenue to move an application for recalling the order if the appeal falls under any of the exceptions mentioned in the circular, such as constitutional validity challenges or where Board's orders are held illegal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jaipur, filed an appeal before the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur Bench against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal pertains to the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The tax effect in dispute was brought to the court's notice and was found to be less than Rs. 20 lac. The court considered CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, dated December 10, 2015, which revised the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Revenue. This circular superseded Instruction No. 5/2014 and aimed to reduce litigation. The court noted that pending appeals below the specified tax limits could be withdrawn or not pressed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court, given that the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lac, as stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 for appeals before High Courts. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the assessee, Saraf Carpet & Textiles. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue filed the appeal, implicitly arguing for its maintainability. However, the judgment focuses on the applicability of the CBDT circular. The Revenue relied on the fact that the appeal was filed before the issuance of the circular or that it falls under exceptions, though these are not explicitly stated as arguments made by the Revenue. The judgment notes that the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lac, which is the threshold for High Court appeals as per the circular.

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
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ------------------------------------------------------ D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.462/2009 Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jaipur Vs. Saraf Carpet & Textiles Date of order : 30.08.2016 HON'BLE MR.K.S. JHAVERI,J. HON'BLE MR.AJAY RASTOGI,J. Mr. R.B. Mathur, for the appellant.

JUDGMENT --------- 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 appeal 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 :- 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

-2-

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 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 -3- 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. Accordingly, in the light of the CBDT Circular dated 10.12.2015, the appeal stand dismissed as not pressed.

(Ajay Rastogi),J. (K.S. Jhaveri),J. BM Gandhi/44 BM Gandhi/44

More judgments on Section 268A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →