ACIT 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HINDUSTAN SUGAR LTD, MUMBAI

Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 has amended Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 for further enhancement of monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Department before the ITAT, High Courts and SLPs/Appeals before Supreme Court as measures for reducing litigation.

CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 has specified that appeals shall not be filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs.20,00,000/-. For this purpose, „tax effect‟ means the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had such total income been C.O. No.264/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2009-10 2 ACIT-3(1)(1) Vs. M/s Bajaj Hindustan Sugar Limited reduced by the amount of income in respect of issues against which appeal is intended to be filed. Further, „tax effect‟ shall be taxes including applicable surcharge and cess. However, the tax will not include any interest thereon, except where chargeability of interest itself is in dispute. In case the chargeability of interest is the issue under dispute, the amount of interest shall be the „tax effect‟. In cases where returned loss is reduced or assessed as income, the „tax effect‟ would include notional tax on disputed additions. In case of penalty order, the „tax effect‟ will mean quantum of penalty deleted or reduced in the order to be appealed against.

As a step towards further management of litigation, CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019, dated 08.08.2019 has fixed the monetary limit for filing of appeals before ITAT at Rs.50,00,000/-.

In the instant appeal filed by the Department, it was averred by the ld. A.R that the „tax effect‟ therein involved was below the monetary limit of Rs.50,00,000/-. The said fact was brought to the notice of the ld. Departmental Representative (for short „D.R‟) who did not controvert the same.

Insofar the cross objection filed by the assessee is concerned, it was stated by the ld. Authorized Representative (for short „A.R‟) for the assessee that pursuant to the dismissal of the revenues appeal, the said cross-objection having been rendered as infructuous may therein be permitted to be withdrawn. Accordingly, in the backdrop of the aforesaid concession of the ld. A.R the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

With the above observations the appeal involving a „tax effect‟ of less than Rs.50,00,000/- is dismissed, and the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.