DCIT 5(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MILI STEELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1563/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 November 2019AY 2012-133 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not in consonance with the CBDT circulars regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal was deemed withdrawn or not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT, but the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars for filing appeals. The Revenue's representative did not provide any justification for the appeal to be an exception.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limits for appeals by the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jothilakshmi Nayak
For Respondent: Shri Snehal R. Shah
Hearing: 04.11.2019Pronounced: 04.11.2019

The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-10, Mumbai dated 25.11.2016 which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act").

2.

The CBDT, vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8th August, 2019, has amended para 3 of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 modifying the monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal. The tax effect in dispute in the captioned appeal is stated to be below the enhanced monetary limit of `50 lakhs specified in the CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019 (supra) read with circular 11.07.2018 (supra).

3.

In this background, the learned D.R. appearing for the Revenue was required to state his position; he has not referred to any material which would show that the captioned appeal is protected by any of the exceptions

M/s. Mili Steels Pvt. Ltd. provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra) and its amendment dated 20th August, 2018.

4.

Without going into the merit of the issues raised, the captioned appeal is deemed to be withdrawn/not pressed as it’s filing is not in consonance with the CBDT circular dated 08.08.2019 (supra) read with circular 11.07.2018 (supra). It is also noted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT & Ors vs. MSEB Holding Company Ltd. [SLP (Civil) No.26373/2019 dated 16.08.2019] has taken cognizance of the enhanced limit while dismissing the SLP arising from the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in WP No. 3642/2018 dated 25.01.2019.

5.

Before parting, we clarify that if on a later date, the Revenue finds that filing of the appeal is protected by any of the exceptions provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular 11.07.2018 (supra), it shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recall of the instant order and reinstitution of the appeal for adjudication on merits. The Tribunal shall consider such application, if any, as per the extant law.

6.

In conclusion, by applying the circular dated 08.08.2019 read with circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra), the captioned appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn/ not pressed.

Above decision was pronounced in the open court at the conclusion of hearing on 20th August, 2019.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →