M/S ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAUDAMINI TRADING & INVESTMENT CO. P. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2362/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 July 2016AY 2001-023 pages
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 prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 10,00,000/- as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The circular is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals.

What were the facts?

The Department appealed an order from the CIT(A) concerning assessment year 2001-02. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the appeal was decided ex-parte. The tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Department's appeal before the Tribunal due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit stipulated by CBDT instructions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI O.P. KANT

For Appellant: Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR

This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 11.2.2013 of Ld. CIT(A)-X, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2001-02 on the following grounds:- “

1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the appeal of the assessee ignoring the facts that notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued within stipulated period as per provision of the Act;

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in ignoring the facts that the assessee attended the entire assessment proceedings only after receiving the notice u/s. 148 issued by the AO.

3. The appellant craves to be allowed to add any fresh grounds of the appeal and / or delete or amend any of the grounds of appeal.”

2.

In this case, Notice of hearing to both the parties were sent, in spite of the same, none attended on behalf of the Assessee, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to issue notice again and again to the Assessee, therefore, we are deciding the present appeal exparte qua Assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR of the Department and perusing the records.

3.

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.”

4.

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.

5.

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. 6. In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 01/07/2016. Sd/- Sd/-

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →