What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 Lakhs are not maintainable, unless they fall under specific exceptions. The present case did not fall under any exceptions.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The tax effect involved in the appeal was below Rs. 20 Lakhs.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal was maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect and the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

ITO vs Ashwinsinh Mohansinh Parmar-HUF… | ITAT Surat 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: SHRI C.M.GARG & SHRI O.P.MEENA

Hearing: 12.10.2018

Page 1 of 2

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत �यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT �ी सी.एम.गग�, �याियक सद�य तथा �ी ओ.पी.मीना, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI C.M.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No. 769/Ahd/2015 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year:2004-05 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Ashwinsingh Mohansingh Silvasa Ward Silvasa Parmr HUF Bhumika City Center Opp. Woodland Hotel Silvasa PAN: AAGHP 3402 H अपीलाथ� Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent

िनधा�रती क� ओर से /Assessee by Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr. D.R. राज�व क� ओर से /Revenue by Shri Hiren R. Vepari, CA सुनवाई क� तारीख/ Date of hearing: 12.10.2018 उ�ोषणा क� तारीख/Pronouncement on : 15.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R PER O. P. MEENA, ACCOUTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-Valsad, dated 30.01.2015 pertaining to Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record and find that tax effect involved in this appeal is below Rs. 20 Lakhs. The ld. DR also did not dispute this fact. We find that the CBDT vide Circular No.3/2018 Dated 11.07.2018 [F.No.279/ Misc.142/ 2007-ITJ (Pt)] has revised the monetary limit for filing of appeal before Tribunal fixing the tax effect limit at Rs.20 lacs. The said Circular supersedes the earlier Circular(s) issued on the subject of tax effect and applies to all

Page 2 of 2

pending appeal retrospectively. The Board has provided exceptions provided under para 10 of the Circular wherein it has been provided that the issues related is to be contested (a) where the Constitution validity of the provision of the Act or Rule is 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 objections has been accepted by the Department or (d) where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets/bank accounts, etc. and by amendment dtd. 20.08.2018 following clauses added or (e) where addition is based on information from external sources like-CBI/ED/DRI/SFIO/GST-DGGI or (f) where prosecution filed by Department is pending in Court. 3. We find that the present case does not fall within the exceptions clause and the tax demand is less than Rs.20 lacs. Therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable as per recent Circular (Supra) and hence dismissed. However, we may make it clear that the Revenue is at liberty to approach to this Tribunal for recalling this order, if it is comes to the notice of the AO that the tax effect is more than the monetary limit provided under Circular or Revenue`s case is fall within ambit of the exceptions provided in the said Circular. 2. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed. 3. The order pronounced in the open court on 15.10.2018. Sd/- Sd/- (सी.एम.गग�)/(C.M. GARG) (ओ.पी.मीना)/(O.P.MEENA) �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER सुरत/ Surat: �दनांक /Dated : 15 October , 2018 Copy of order forwarded to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/ Guard file of Tribunal. By order / / TRUE COPY / / Assistant Registrar, Surat

ITO, VAPI vs. ASHWINSINH MOHANSINH PARMAR-HUF, SILVASSA

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