ACIT, CC- 30, NEW DELHI vs. J H JEWELLERS, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4057/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 August 2018AY 2007-084 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 Revenue's appeal did not appear to fall under any of the exceptions to the CBDT circular. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine, with liberty to seek recall if it met an exception.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(Appeals) for AY 2007-08. The tax effect was below the monetary limit specified by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The Revenue sought time to ascertain if the appeal fell under exceptions to the circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal, despite having a low tax effect, should be contested on merits based on recent amendments to CBDT circulars regarding exceptions for appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. Dr
Hearing: 23.08.2018Pronounced: 27.08.2018

Heard together (2 matters)

CO No. 179/Del/2017
ITA No. 4057/Del/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER PER BENCH

The appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the Assessee are directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-11, New Delhi dated 29.3.2017 for A.Y. 2007-08. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Admittedly, the tax effect is below the monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs.

3.

In terms of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 read with Section 268 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, this appeal by the Revenue should have been withdrawn or should not have been pressed by the Revenue.

4.

Ld. Sr. DR, however placed on record the copy of CBDT’s Instructions dated 20.08.2018 bearing F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) and submitted that there has been an amendment to para 10 of the Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 wherein, the said Para 10 has been amended as under:- “10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect.

(a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge, or (b) Where Board’s order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where addition relates to undisclosed foreign income / undisclosed foreign assets (including financial assets)/undisclosed foreign bank account. (e) Where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI/ ED/DRI/SFIO / Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). (f) Cases where prosecution has been filed by the Department and is pending in the Court.”

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →