Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
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 02.1.2014 of Ld. CIT(A)-, Rohtak 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 law and in facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 15,97,656/- made by the AO u/s. 40(ba) of the I.T. Act on account of commission income received by the assessee which was dividend amongst its members.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 15,97,656/- made by the AO by observing that the case of the assessee is not covered by the case law of Meera & Co. vs. CIT reported in 139 CTR 492, 224 ITR 635, which was relied upon by the AO in his assessment order.
3. That the appellant craves for permission to add, delete or amend the ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal.
We find that Revenue in the Grounds of Appeal
before the Tribunal has challenged the deletion of addition of Rs. 15,97,656/- vide ground no. 1, as aforesaid.
3. 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.
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 Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/ not pressed.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. 6. In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03/05/2016.