DCIT 33(3), MUMBAI vs. RAGULEELA MEGAMALL KANDIVALI WEST PREMISES CO.OP.SOC. LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 595/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 August 2019AY 2015-163 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 decided that the appeals did not survive for consideration due to the CBDT circular amending monetary limits for appeal filing. The appeals were deemed withdrawn or not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals before the ITAT, but the tax effect in dispute was below the enhanced monetary limit for filing appeals as per a CBDT circular. The Revenue did not provide any material to show the appeals were protected by exceptions.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue are maintainable in light of the revised monetary limits for filing appeals stipulated by the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not Applicable

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri G.S. Pannu

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Hearing: 21.08.2019Pronounced: 21.08.2019

The captioned appeal in and 34 appeals [as per Annexure-1] preferred by the Revenue, have been listed by the Registry before the Bench on the ground that they do not survive for consideration in view of the CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August, 2019.

2.

The CBDT, vide Circular dated 8th August, 2019 (supra), 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 appeals 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 2 M/s. Tushaco Pumps Pvt. Ltd. would show that the captioned appeals are protected by any of the exceptions 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Without going into the merit of the issues raised in the captioned appeal, they are deemed to be withdrawn/not pressed, as their filing is not in consonance with the CBDT circular dated 08.08.2019 (supra) read with circular 11.07.2018 (supra).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 the tax effect in dispute in any of the captioned appeals is more than the limit prescribed in the Circular dated 08.08.2019 (supra), or it 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 order and reinstitution of the appeal for adjudication on merits. The Tribunal shall consider such applications, if any, as per the extant law.

6.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →