Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “G” : DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR
This appeal by Revenue has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi, Dated 04.05.2017, for the A.Y. 2012-2013, challenging the deletion of addition of Rs.1 crores under section 68 of the 2 ITA.No.4891/Del./2017 M/s. Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. I.T. Act, 1961 and in deleting the addition of Rs.75,000/- on account of unexplained commission.
Admittedly, the tax effect in the Departmental Appeal is less than Rs.50 lakhs. Vide Circular No.3/2018 Dated 11th July, 2018 issued by CBDT under section 268A of the I.T. Act, it has been directed that the Department shall not file appeal before the Tribunal in case where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs.20 lakhs. It is also directed that this instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in the Tribunal. Pending appeals below the specified tax limit may be withdrawn/not pressed by the Department. The CBDT Vide Circular No.17/2019 Dated 08.08.2019 amended the earlier Circular No.3/2018 (supra) whereby it has been directed that monetary limit for filing the Departmental appeal in Income Tax Cases may be enhanced further through this amendment in para-3 of the Circular mentioned above and accordingly, the monetary limit for filing the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal have been enhanced to Rs.50 lakhs. Since Circular No.17/2019
3 ITA.No.4891/Del./2017 M/s. Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Dated 08.08.2019 have been issued to amend its earlier Circular No.3/2018 (supra), therefore, all the conditions of earlier Circular No.3/2018 shall apply accordingly.
The Ld. D.R. in view of the above Board’s Circulars did not press the Departmental Appeal. The case of the Department would not fall in the exceptions provided in the above Board Circulars. In the result, the Departmental appeal is not maintainable as the appeal is filed against the Board instructions referred to above and therefore, the appeal of the Department is liable to be dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the Department dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court.