ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S IFFCO CHHATTISGARH POWER LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6483/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 September 2016AY 2011-123 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 as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. Therefore, the Department should have withdrawn or not pressed the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Department appealed an order by the CIT(A) which treated interest earned by the assessee on share application money as capital receipts. The appeal was filed for assessment year 2011-12.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Department's appeal was maintainable before the Tribunal based on the tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not Applicable

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU

For Respondent: DR Assessee by :

Date of Hearing : 22-08-2016 Date of Order : 02-09-2016

O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 07.9.2015 of Ld. CIT(A)-3, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2011-12 on the following grounds:-

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in treating the interest earned by the assessee by parking the share application money in bank account as capital receipts instead of income from other sources.

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying upon the Hon’ble

Delhi high Court judgment in the case of M/s Indian Oil Panipat Consortium Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 255 and also upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of M/s Bokaro Steel Limited (1999) 236 ITR 315 without appreciating the ratio of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of M/s Tuticorin Alkalies Chemicals & Fertilizers Limited 227 ITR 172 3. The appellant craves to add, alter, amend, modify, add or forego any ground of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of the appeal.”

2. From the above, I 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.

Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10th 4. December, 2015, I am of the view that the Revenue should have withdrawn/ not pressed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. I am 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 02/09/2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →