DCIT, DEHRADUN vs. SH. DESHPAL SINGH KOHLI, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3160/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 September 2018AY 2009-105 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The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeal should have been withdrawn or not pressed, as it did not fall under any of the exceptions to the CBDT circular regarding monetary limits. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT, but the tax effect was below the monetary limit specified by the CBDT. The assessee also filed a cross-objection. The ITAT noted that the appeal did not fall under any of the exceptions where adverse judgments should be contested regardless of tax effect.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal, with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit and not falling under any exceptions, should be dismissed in limine as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, Adv., Shri Rajat
For Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT DR, Shri Ashwani Taneja, Adv., Shri Rajat
Hearing: 28.06.2018Pronounced: 25.09.2018

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 3160/Del/2015
C.O. 479/Del/2015

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

assessee are directed against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A), Dehradun dated 26.02.2015 for A.Y. 2009-10.

2.

In , admittedly, the tax effect is below the monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs. In terms of CBDT C.O. 479/Del/2015 Assessment year 2009-10 Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 read with Section 268 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, this appeal by the Revenue should have been withdrawn or should not have been pressed by the Revenue.

2.2 We also note that vide CBDT’s Instructions dated 20.08.2018 bearing F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt), there has been an amendment to para 10 of the Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 wherein the said para 10 has been amended as under:-

“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).

C.O. 479/Del/2015 Assessment year 2009-10 (f) Cases where prosecution has been filed by the Department and is pending in the Court. ”

2.3 However, after going through the records before us, we are of the opinion that apparently the Department’s Appeal is not covered by any of the aforesaid exceptions as enumerated in the aforesaid amendment to the Instructions and, therefore, delaying the disposal of the appeal by waiting for the Report from the Field Officers will not be in true spirit of the Circular. Accordingly, we deem it fit to treat this Appeal as dismissed with the liberty to the Department to seek recall of this order by filing a Misc.

Application before us in case the Department’s Appeal falls in any of the above exceptions. Accordingly, in view of the CBDT’s Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.7.2018, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed in limine.

4.

As far as the CO of the assessee is concerned, the same, being supportive to the department’s appeal, also stands dismissed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed.

C.O. 479/Del/2015 Assessment year 2009-10 Order pronounced in the Open Court on 25.09.2018.

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →