What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the tax effect was below the monetary limit specified by the CBDT, the appeals filed by the Revenue were liable to be dismissed. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals.

The Revenue filed appeals before the ITAT. The assessee contended that the tax effect in these appeals was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. The Revenue's counsel conceded to this submission.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeals are maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit by the CBDT.

DCIT vs M/S Texmo Industries, Coimbatore | ITAT Chennai 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 18.08.2022Pronounced: 18.08.2022

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

These appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, dated 30.03.2022 and pertains to assessment years 2012-13 &2015-16.

At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the tax effect in these appeals filed by the Revenue is less than the monetary limit of ₹50,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT to file appeals by the Revenue before the Tribunal as per the CBDT Circular No.17/2019, dated 08.08.2019. The ld. DR fairly conceded the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. Being so, the Revenue authorities are & 516/Chny/2022 for AYs 2012-13 & 2015-16 M/s.Texmo Industries :: 2 ::

precluded from filing the appeals before the Tribunal, since the tax effect is less than ₹50,00,000/- in these appeals and the appeals filed by the Revenue are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. However, the Department is at liberty to seek recall of the above, if it is found by the department that the said appeals are covered by exceptions given in Claue-10 of Instruction No.3 of 2018 issued by CBDT.

As per the ground No.2.2, it is observed that there is no audit objection for AYs 2012-13 & 2015-16. However, it is mentioned that there was an audit objection for AY 2011-12. Since, there was no audit objection for AYs 2012-13 & 2015-16, we are of the opinion that the case is not covered by Clause-10(c) of the Instruction No.3 of 2018.

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced on the 18th day of August, 2022, in Chennai.

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. M/S TEXMO INDUSTRIES, COIMBATORE

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