ITO, SONEPAT vs. RAMPAT SINGH, SONEPAT

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 22.12.2014 in relation to the Assessment Year 2009-10.

The Department has requested for adjournment in all the cases, including the present case, fixed today for hearing before the Bench by giving the reason that: “Sr. DR is not available.” There is neither any one from the side of the Revenue to represent the Revenue nor to explain the reasons as to why the Bench be allowed to crash. I am satisfied that the Revenue’s prayer for adjournment cannot be accepted. The same is, therefore, rejected and the appeal is being taken up for disposal on merits ex parte.

I have perused the relevant material on record. It is observed that the total addition made in this case is Rs.14,80,256/-, the tax effect on which is less than Rs.10,00,000/. I find that pursuant to the mandate of section 268A, the CBDT has issued Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015 with retrospective effect, revising the monetary limit to Rs.10,00,000/- for not filing appeals before the Tribunal. The extant appeal is, therefore, not maintainable.

From para 10 of the above Circular it is palpable that the Instruction is applicable to the pending appeals also with retrospective effect and there is a clear-cut direction to the Department to withdraw or not press such appeals filed before the ITAT wherein tax effect is less than Rs.10,00,000/-. Going by the prescription of the aforenoted Circular, I am of the view that the Revenue should have either not filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal or withdrawn the same as the tax effect in this appeal is admittedly less than the prescribed limit for not filing the appeals. Ex conseqeunti, I dismiss the instant appeal without going into merits of the case.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.