What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention regarding the tax effect being below the monetary limit. Following CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, the Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable.

The Department appealed an order by the CIT(A) that deleted additions made by the AO. The assessee's counsel argued that the tax effect was below the CBDT's prescribed limit for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

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

ACIT vs Sh. Krishna Kumar, New Delhi | ITAT Delhi 2016

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

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

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmita Jha, Sr. DR

This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 31.8.2014 of Ld. CIT(A)-XXVIII, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2009-10 on the following grounds:- “

On the facts and circumstances of the case,

1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO not appreciating the fact assessee is following cash system of accounting as per which income is taxable on receipt basis.

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of current liabilities not appreciating the fact that in spite of numerous opportunities given by the AO, the assessee had not furnished details of professional fees received and advances.

3. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.

The appellant can craves leave to add, amend or modify any/ all the grounds of appeal

before or during the course of the appeal.

2. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated that the tax involved in the present appeal is Rs. 7,83,062/- which is below the taxable limit of Rs. 10 lacs, as prescribed by the CBDT in filing the appeal before the Tribunal by the Department. Hence, he requested that the Appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed on this account.

3. Ld. DR did not controvert the contention raised by the Ld. Counsel of the Assessee, but she relied upon the order of the AO.

4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records, we find force in the assessee’s counsel contention 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.”

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.

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 04/05/2016.

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. KRISHNA KUMAR, NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments