What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the prescribed limit as per CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee's counsel pointed out that the tax effect in the appeal was below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakh.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit.

ACIT vs Sandeep Balchandra Kerkar | ITAT Mumbai 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘J’ MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Chaturvedi Sr.DR, Shri Vinayak R. Velankar

Hearing: 13/08/2018

सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of Hearing: 13/08/2018 13/08/2018 आदेश क� तार�ख /Date of Order:

Sandeep Balchandra Kerkar आदेश / O R D E R Per Joginder Singh(Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 23/01/2017 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

During hearing of this appeal, at the outset, Shri Vinayak R. Velankar, ld. counsel for the assessee, pointed out that the tax effect in the present appeal, filed by the Revenue, is below prescribed monetary limit of Rs.20 lakh. The ld. DR, Shri V. K. Chaturvedi, did not controvert the factual matrix.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above, it is noted that the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed limit of Rs.20 lakh, vide instruction/Circular No.3 of 2018, issued by CBDT (F No.279/Misc./142/ 2007-ITJ(PT) dated 11/07/2018. As per the circular, wherein, the Department was advised/directed by the Board not to file appeal in the cases where the tax effect does not exceed the following monetary limit.:-

Sl. Appeals in Income –tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) No. 1. Before ITAT 20,00,000/- 2. U/s 260 A before Hon’ble High 50,00,000/- Court 3. Before Hon’ble Supreme Court 1,00,00,000/-

In view of the above instruction, since, the tax effect is less than Rs.20,00,000/- (not controverted by Ld. DR also), consequently, the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable, therefore, dismissed.

Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable.

This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of Ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of hearing on 13/08/2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य /JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 13/08/2018 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/.�न.स. आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant (Respective assessee) 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai, 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

ASST CIT 21(3), MUMBAI vs. SANDEEP BALCHANDRA KERKAR, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments