ASST CIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs RAMAN AND WEIL P. LTD, MUMBAI

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM

For Appellant: Shri Jayshree Talsani

For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria, Shri Jayshree Talsani

Hearing: 03/08/2018Pronounced: 13/08/2018

Date of Hearing 03/08/2018 Date of Pronouncement 13/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):

These are the appeals filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) 3, Mumbai dated 13/12/2016 for A.Y.2005-06,2009-10, 2010-2011 & 2011-12 in the matter of order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

We have heard ld. Departmental Representative and perused the materials available on the record in respect of the above appeals. It is observed that the demand/tax effect in the Revenue appeals is not exceeding Rs. 20 lakhs. Under the power vested by sec. 268A(1) of the I T. Act, CBDT has recently issued Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 instructing the authorities below that departmental appeals should not be filed before 1TAT where the demand/tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs. The circular specifically mentions that the instructions are applicable to all pending appeals also. 6. Subject to some exceptions, it is further directed by CBDT that all the departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax effect is less than 20 lakhs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the Departmental representative. 7. The present appeals are not covered by any exceptions mentioned in the said CBDT circular. Since the tax demand in dispute in these departmental appeals does not exceed the limit of Rs. 20 lakhs as set out by CBDT, such appeals are not maintainable in view of fore goings. Accordingly the appeals of the Department are dismissed as not pressed/withdrawn and hence infructuous.

ASST CIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RAMAN AND WEIL P. LTD, MUMBAI