ACIT, BHIWANI vs. M/S. VEGAN COLLOIDS LTD., BHIWANI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6715/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2016AY 2008-093 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 due to the low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The Department should have withdrawn or not pressed the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Department appealed against the deletion of a penalty by the CIT(A). The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 10,00,000/-. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Department's appeal before the Tribunal given the tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 221(1),Section 140A(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI J.S. REDDY

This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 26.9.2013 of Ld. CIT(A), Bikaner pertaining to assessment year 2008-09 on the following grounds:- “

1. The ld. CIT(A), Bikaner has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 4,43,990/- imposed by the AO, Bikaner u/s. 221(1) read with section 140A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by observing that the order was illegal and without jurisdiction.

2. The Ld. CIT(A), Bikaner has erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee did not raise the issue of jurisdiction at the time of penalty proceedings before the AO.

3. The Ld. CIT(A), Bikaner has erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee has accepted the jurisdiction by its conduct.

4. The Appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is heard and disposed off.”

2.

In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor his authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, 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 and perusing the records.

3.

We find that Revenue in the Grounds of Appeal

before the Tribunal has challenged the deletion of penalty of Rs. 4,43,990/- vide ground no. 1, as aforesaid.

4. 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.”

5.

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.

6.

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. 7. In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10/5/2016.

More judgments on Section 221(1)

All 159 judgments and leading authorities on Section 221(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →