Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, L Bench, Mumbai
Before: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan SinghShri Nipun I. Thakkar
The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue pertaining to A.Y. 2010-11 is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-44, Mumbai dated 05.10.2016 which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") dated 31.03.2015. Assessee has also filed a cross objection in support of the order of the CIT(A).
2 CO. 169/M/2018 Shri Nipun I. Thakkar 2. The CBDT, vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, has revised the monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Department before the Tribunal with retrospective effect. The tax effect in dispute in the captioned appeal is stated to be below the monetary limit of `20 lakhs specified in the CBDT Circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra).
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 would show that the captioned appeal is protected by any of the exceptions provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular (supra).
Without going into the merit of the issue raised, the captioned appeal is deemed to be withdrawn/not pressed as it’s filing is not in consonance with the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra). Before parting we may clarify that if on a later date, the Revenue finds that filing of the appeal is protected by the exceptions provided in para 10 of the CBDT circular (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 application, if any, as per the extant law.
In conclusion, by applying the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 (supra), the captioned appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn/ not pressed.
Since the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, the cross objection of the assessee becomes academic and is also dismissed as it is only in support of the order of the CIT(A).