DCIT, CIRCLE-3, GURGAON vs. PAY U PAYMENTS, GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2185/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 August 2018AY 2013-149 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 due to CBDT Circular No. 03 of 2018, which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 20,00,000/-, and since the tax effect in these appeals was less than this limit, the appeals were not maintainable. Cross objections filed by assessees were either dismissed as not pressed or became infructuous.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) heard multiple appeals filed by the Department against various assessees. The appeals were filed against orders passed by the respective CIT(A) for different assessment years.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of appeals filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal when the tax effect was below the revised monetary limit set by CBDT circulars, and whether any exceptions applied.

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 BENCHES “I-2”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K.PANDA, AM & SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JM

For Appellant: Smt. Neena Grover, Adv. C.O.No.99/Del/18, Adv. AADCP5443Q, Adv. Sh. Lakshya, Adv. Sh. Saurash, CA C.O.283//Del/2016, Adv. New Delhi, Adv. AAACR0737N
Hearing: 23.08.2018Pronounced: 24/08/2018

Heard together (5 matters)

C.O.No.99/Del/18
ITA 1646/Del/18
ITA 3483/Del/16
C.O.85/Del/2017
ITA 770/Del/17

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

Revenue by: Sh. H.K.Chaudhary, CIT, D.R. Date of Hearing : 23.08.2018 Date of pronouncement: 24/08/2018 ORDER PER BENCH: These appeals by Department are against different assessee’s and Cross objections/Appeals by some assessee’s are heard together. These appeals have been filed against orders passed by respective Ld.CIT(A), in relation to different assessment years.

2.

Ld. CIT.DR appeared on behalf of Revenue. In some appeals, assessees hasrecorded appearance through their representatives, while in others, assessees remained unrepresented.

3.

We have heard the parties. It is found that pursuant to mandate of section 268A, CBDT has issued Circular No. 03 of 2018, dated 11th July, 2018 with retrospective effect, revising monetary limit to Rs.20,00,000/- for not filing appeals before the Tribunal. Since tax effect involved in instant appeals is less than Rs.20,00,000/-, therefore they are not maintainable. The Ld.CIT.D.R., although supported orders of Ld.AO, could not controvert the fact that tax effect involved in these appeals is less than Rs.20,00,000/-.

4.

On Going through above referred CBDT Circular, it is clear that it is applicable to all pending appeals with retrospective effect, and there is a clear-cut direction to the Department to either withdraw, or not press such appeals filed before the Tribunal, wherein tax effect is less than Rs.20,00,000/-. We are, therefore, of the view that all the above appeals are not maintainable, as tax effect in these appeals are admittedly less than Rs. 20,00,000/-.

5.

The Ld.CIT.DR brought to our notice letter dated 20.08.2018 by Director (ITJ), CBDT, New Delhi addressed to All Principal CCITs in respect of para no. 10 of Circular dated 11.7.2018, enumerating certain exceptional instances where appeals filed by revenue should be contested, notwithstanding low tax effect. For the sake of convenience the same is reproduced as under: “10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entitled is less than the monetary limits specified in paragraph 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

More judgments on Section 268A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →