THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S DALMIA CEMENT LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/117/2005HC DelhiDLHC01059026200501 March 2017Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable. The Court referred to Clause 10 of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which mandates that pending appeals with a tax effect below the specified limits should be withdrawn or not pressed. The Court observed that the tax effect in the present appeal is below the prescribed limit of ₹20,00,000/-. Therefore, the appeal cannot be prosecuted. The Court dismissed the appeal on this ground. However, it clarified that if the Assessing Officer identifies any exception as per the said Circular, the Revenue is at liberty to seek restoration of the appeal through an appropriate application. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal pertains to the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The core of the matter revolves around the applicability of Circular No. 21/2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), which outlines monetary limits for preferring appeals. The High Court noted that the tax effect in this appeal falls below the prescribed limit of ₹20,00,000/-. Consequently, the appeal was deemed no longer maintainable. The judgment does not specify the original order or action under challenge before the ITAT or the amount in dispute.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015? (Question of law) The Revenue contended that the appeal should be dismissed as it does not meet the monetary threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The Circular, specifically Clause 10, states that pending appeals below the specified tax limits may be withdrawn or not pressed. The Revenue argued that the tax effect in this particular appeal is below the limit of ₹20,00,000/-, rendering the appeal non-maintainable. The Respondent (assessee) did not present any arguments, as indicated by 'None' appearing for them.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +

ITA 117/2005

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate.

versus

M/S DALMIA CEMENT LTD.

..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R %

01.03.2017

This Court had framed a question of law for consideration in this appeal. Given its pendency vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) spelt out the monetary limits beyond which appeals could be preferred before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court respectively. Clause 10 of the Circular reads as below:- “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.”

This Court notices that the tax effect i.e. upon the assessed income, is

below the prescribed limit of `20,00,000/-. The present appeal cannot be, therefore, prosecuted and is no longer maintainable. It is, however, clarified that in the event, the Assessing Officer discerns any exception in terms of the said Circular, it is open to the Revenue to seek restoration of the concerned appeal by an appropriate application. The appeal is dismissed but in the above terms.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

NAJMI WAZIRI, J MARCH 01, 2017 /vikas/

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →