What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue Department was not maintainable. This was based on CBDT Instruction No. 03 of 2018, which mandates a minimum tax effect for departmental appeals.

The Revenue Department filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 20 lacs.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue Department is maintainable when the tax effect is below the threshold stipulated by CBDT instructions.

ITO vs Sh. Syed Musadiq Shah, Srinagar | s.250(6) | ITAT Amritsar 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SH. SANJAY ARORA & SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY

Hearing: 16.04.2019Pronounced: 23.04.2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.598(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year:2011-12

Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sh. Syed Musadiq Shah Ward-3(3), Srinagar Prop. M/s Hotel Pride Continental Boulevard, Srinagar [PAN:AMLPS 8028F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR) Respondent by: None

Date of hearing: 16.04.2019 Date of pronouncement: 23.04.2019 ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY The instant appeal has been preferred by the Revenue Department against the order dated 14.07.2014 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-Jammu, u/s 250(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act’).

At the time of hearing, it is seen that the tax effect involved in this appeal of the Revenue Department is less than Rs.20 lacs, hence, the present appeal filed by the Revenue Department is liable to be dismissed, as the same is not maintainable, in view of the latest CBDT Instruction No.03 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018.

ITA No.598(Asr)/2014 (A.Y.2011-12) 2 ITO v. Sh. Sayed Musadiq Shah, Srinagar

The Ld. DR also agreed that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.20 lacs. Hence, as per CBDT Instruction No. 03 of 2018, dated 11th July, 2018, which is binding on the Department, the Department is precluded from filing the present appeal, as this instruction is applicable retrospectively. Therefore, the aforesaid appeal can not survive any longer. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department is dismissed as not maintainable.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23.04.2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY ARORA) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23.04.2019 /PK/ Ps. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) Sh. Sh. Syed Musadiq Shah Prop. M/s Hotel Pride Continental Boulevard, Srinagar (2) The ITO, Ward-3(3), Srinagar (3) The CIT(A)-Jammu (4) The CIT concerned (5) The SR DR, I.T.A.T., Amritsar

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, SRINAGAR vs. SH. SYED MUSADIQ SHAH, SRINAGAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments