What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal should not have been filed or should have been withdrawn given the low tax effect. The appeal was dismissed without going into the merits of the case.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT, but it was identified that the tax effect involved was less than Rs. 20,00,000/-. The Revenue's counsel acknowledged this but sought permission to contest based on certain conditions in departmental circulars.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal with a tax effect below the prescribed limit should be dismissed, notwithstanding potential exceptions mentioned in departmental circulars.

ACIT vs M/S. Sahdev Jewellers, New Delhi | ITAT Delhi 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “G”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI O.P. KANT

For Appellant: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.DR

For Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Jha, Advocate

Hearing: 30.01.2019Pronounced: 30.01.2019

ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 13th June, 2011, passed by CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi, pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09. It has been identified by the Registry that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than Rs.20,00,000/-.

During the course of hearing, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that no doubt the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs.20 lakhs, thus, bound by the departmental instruction, the appeal has to be withdrawn. However, attention was invited to para 10 of Circular No. 3/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, which has been modified by Circular dated 20th August, 2018 and in terms of the said modification the Departmental Representatives made a prayer that permission to pray for recall of the order may be granted in case any of the conditions in the reports made available by the A.O. subsequently, show that the issues were required to be contested. The modified para is extracted hereunder:

10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect: (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an 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 objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where addition relates to undisclosed foreign income/undisclosed foreign assets (including financial assets)/ undisclosed foreign bank account. (e) Where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI/ ED/ DRI/ SFIO/ Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). (f) Cases where prosecution has been filed by the Department and is pending in the Court.

Going by the prescription of Circular No. 3/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, we are of the view that the Revenue should have Tribunal or withdrawn the same as the tax effect in the appeal is admittedly less than the prescribed limit, i.e., Rs. 20,00,000/- for not filing the appeals. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue without going into merits of the case. However, it is made clear that the Department is at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application, if the tax effect is found to be more than the prescribed limit of Rs.20,00,000/- or any of the conditions etc., as available in the amendment carried out in para 10 of Circular No. 3/2018, dated 20.08.2018, is made out.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 30th January, 2019.

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHDEV JEWELLERS, NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments