ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MPS LIMITED, CHENNAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit, the Revenue was precluded from filing the appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was liable to be dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 49 days, which was condoned. The tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circular.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA
आदेश / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Bengaluru in DRP File No.392/DRP-2-BNG/2015-16, dated 22.12.2015 relevant to the Assessment Year 2011 - 2012.
There is a delay of forty-nine [49] days in filing the appeal. The Revenue had filed an affidavit wherein he has made a detailed submission. From the submissions that were made, we find that there is sufficient cause to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay is condoned.
As far as the merits of the case is concerned, the tax effect in the appeal filed by the Revenue is 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 learned Departmental Representative fairly conceded the submissions made by the learned 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 the appeal and thus, the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be dismissed. The Department is at liberty to seek recall of the above order, if the tax effect is above the prescribed limit and moreover the learned Departmental Representative was not sure about as to whether the issue raised in the appeal of the Revenue was not arising out of RAP objection, as no specific ground was raised in the grounds of appeal.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 23rd February, 2021 in Chennai.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026