What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed four appeals due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT circular. For the fifth appeal, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order on merits.

The Revenue filed five appeals against the CIT(A)'s order. For four assessment years, the tax effect was below the CBDT's monetary limit for appeals, leading to their dismissal. For the fifth assessment year, the CIT(A) had allowed the appeal without a speaking order.

What were the issues?

Whether appeals filed by the Revenue are maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit. Whether the CIT(A) passed a speaking order on merits.

ACIT vs M/S. Viswakarma Mines & Building… | ITAT Chennai 2022

Before: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Hearing: 19.01.2022Pronounced: 19.01.2022

O R D E R

PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

These five appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against common order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, dated 22.06.2016 relevant to the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13.

When the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010- 11 and 2011-12 were taken up for hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the tax effect in these appeals filed by the Revenue are less than the monetary limit of ₹.50,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT to file an appeal 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 precluded from filing the appeal before the Tribunal, since the tax effect is less than ₹.50,00,000/- in these appeals. Thus, the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, these appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. However, the Department is at liberty to seek recall of the above order since, the ld. DR was not sure about as to whether the issue raised in these appeals of the Revenue are not arising out of RAP objection as no specific ground was raised in the grounds of appeal.

3. So far as appeal for the assessment year 2012-13 in is concerned, the ld. DR has submitted that without discussing anything on merits, the ld. CIT(A) has simply allowed the appeal of the assessee and submitted that suitable direction may be given to the ld. CIT(A) to pass speaking order on merits in accordance with law against which, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has not raised any objection.

4. By considering the above submissions of the both the parties, we remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to pass speaking order afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in 2626, 2627 and 2628/Chny/2016 are dismissed and the appeal in I.T.A. No. 2629/Chny/2016 is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on the 19th January, 2022 at Chennai.

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VISWAKARMA MINES & BUILDING MATERIAL PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments