ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI SUNIL KUMAR GOEL PROP., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4617/DEL/2012Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 April 2017AY 2009-104 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 tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable and should have been withdrawn or not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 18,24,525/- by the CIT(A). The assessee had initially not disclosed capital gains but declared it during assessment, claiming exemption under Section 54.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect is below the CBDT's prescribed monetary limit for appeals before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

ORDER

PER H.S. SIDHU, JM

1.

The Department has filed this Appeal which is emanate from the Order dated 28.6.2012 of Ld. CIT(A)-XXV, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. The grounds raised

in the revenue’s appeal reads as under:- “1. On the facts and in circumstances the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 18,24,525/- despite the fact that the assessee had not disclosed the capital gain in the computation of income and the same was declared by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assesse despite the fact that only by entering into an agreement to sale for purchase of property does not entitle the assessee to claim exemption u/s. 54 of the I.T. Act, 1961.

3. On the facts and in circumstances the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in deleting the addition despite the fact that the exemption claimed by the assessee was not allowable as the assessee did not purchase residential property or kept the sale proceed in the notified scheme with Bank as per requirements of the provisions of Section 54 of the I.T. Act, 1961.

The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing this appeal.”

2.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated tax effect in the Revenue’s Appeal is less than the prescribed limit of Rs. 10 lacs as fixed by the CBDT. Therefore, he requested that the Appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed on this account.

3.

On the other hand, Ld. DR did not controvert the contention raised by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee, but he relied upon the order of the AO.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. After perusing the records, we find that tax effect in the Revenue’s appeal is below the limit of Rs. 10 lacs, as fixed by the CBDT and, therefore, the Department’s Appeal is not maintainable, in view of the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) by the CBDT. For the sake of convenience, the relevant para nos. 3 & 10 of the aforesaid CBDT’s Circular are reproduced as under:- “3. Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: Monetary Limit (in S No Appeals in Income-tax matters Rs) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.

10.

This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/ not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”

5.

It is not in dispute that the Board’s instruction or directions issued to the income- tax authorities are binding on those authorities, therefore, the Department should have withdrawn/ not pressed the present Appeal, in view of the aforesaid instructions since the tax effect in the instant Appeal is less than the amount of Rs. 10 lacs, prescribed in the above said CBDT’s Instructions. Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, 6. we are of the view that the Revenue should have withdrawn/ not pressed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. We are also of the view that the said Instructions are applicable for the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in Tribunal. Accordingly, the Revenue’s Appeal is dismissed. 7. In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 19/04/2017.

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →