ITO, MEERUT vs. SHRI AJAY MAHESHWARI, MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3752/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 August 2018AY 2009-103 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 appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The circular mandates that appeals should not be filed if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c). The penalty was imposed for alleged concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars related to long-term capital gains on land sale.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S.K.YADAV & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Agarwal, FCA
For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR, Shri Rohit Agarwal, FCA
Hearing: 22/06/2018Pronounced: 09/08/2018

PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the ld CIT(A), Meerut dated 22.03.2016. 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and fact in cancelling the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, ignoring the fact that the assessee concealed the particulars of his income and furnished inaccurate particulars of his income since he did not declare the long term capital gain on the sale of his income since he did not declare the long term capital gain on the sale of his land on which he was liable to pay tax.

1.

2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals may be set aside and that of the AO be restored.”

3. This appeal filed by the Department is directed against the order dated 19.12.2012 of ld CIT(A)-XIII, New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2004- 05, wherein, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs. 12,60,000/- levied by the ld AO is deleted. Page | 1 ITO Vs Ajay Maheshwari (Assessment Year: 2009-10) 4. At the outset of the hearing itself, the ld. DR brought to our attention that CBDT vide Circular No.03/2018 dated 11TH July 2018 has decided that the revenue would not prefer an appeal before the Tribunal if the tax effect is less than Rs.20 lakhs. Therefore, he pleaded that the appeal of the revenue be decided as per the instruction of the CBDT. Ld AR also reiterated same facts.

5.

We have heard both the sides on the issue and perused the material. We find that the CBDT vide circular dated 11th July 2018 has revised the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hon’ble High Courts and Hon’ble Supreme Court. The relevant para of the aforesaid circular is 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 :- Sl.No. Appeals in Income-tax Monetary Limit(in matters Rs.) 1. Before Appellate Tribunal 20,00,000 2. Before High Court 50,00,000 3. Before Supreme Court 1,00,00,000 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.”

6.

We find that the tax effect involves in the appeal of the Revenue is below Rs.20 lakhs. There is no dispute that the Board’s instructions 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 instruction since the tax effect in the instant appeal is less than the amount of Rs.20 lakhs. 5. In view of the above, Circular No.3/2018 dated 10.07.2018 will apply to all pending appeals. Therefore the precedent, it is held that the appeal is not maintainable in the instant case as the tax effect is less than Rs.20 lakhs. Accordingly, it is held that appeal filed by the revenue is not maintainable. Page | 2

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →