DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RAJASTHAN ANTIBIOTICS LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6690/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 June 2016AY 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 Department's appeal was not maintainable due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The circular mandates that appeals with a tax effect below a certain limit should not be filed or should be withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Department appealed against the deletion of a penalty by the CIT(A) related to the disallowance of current repairs. The tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was less than Rs. 10,00,000.

What were the issues?

Whether the Department's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit set by the CBDT.

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 ‘D’, NEW DELHI

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

This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 29.10.2013 of Ld. CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2009-10 on the following grounds:-

1.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.

CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 8,06,792/- imposed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on the addition made on account of disallowance of current repairs, treating the same as of capital nature. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.

CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 8,06,792/-, ignoring the facts that the assessee failed to justify its claim during the course of penalty proceedings.

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

2.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. 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.”

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.

4.

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.

5.

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 01/06/2016.

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 →