ITO WARD 15(2) vs. RANUTROL INSTRUMENTATION LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1727/DEL/2008Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 February 2017AY 1995-19963 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 Department's appeal was not maintainable due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The Department should have withdrawn or not pressed the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Department appealed the CIT(A)'s order deleting a disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80-O. The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 10,00,000.

What were the issues?

Whether the Department's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit by the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80-O

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACOUNTANT MEMBER

For Appellant: Smt. Shaveta Nakra Dutta, Sr. DR

This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 26.2.2008 of Ld. CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 1995-96 on the following grounds:- “ (1) In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 80-O of the I.T. Act on the basis of total foreign remittance received during the year, without considering the fact that the assessee was maintaining its accounts on the mercantile basis and the foreign remittance in part related to income of earlier years. (2) In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred by allowing excessive relief to the assessee. (3) The appellant craves to be allowed to amend, delete or add any other grounds of appeal during the course of hearing of this appeal.

2.

From the above, we find that the tax effect in the Revenue’s Appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, 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 S No Appeals in Income-tax matters (in 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.”

3.

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.

4.

Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, 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.

5.

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 28/02/2017.

More judgments on Section 80-O

All 57 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80-O →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →