Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI
Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Ashwani Taneja
आदेश / O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja (Accountant Member):
The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I,
2 Pratik Builders & Estate Developers P. L. Mumbai {(in short ‘CIT(A)’}, dated 29.01.2014 for the assessment year 2008-09, decided against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short ‘AO’) u/s 143(3) of the Act.
During the course of hearing, arguments were made by Shri B.N. Rao, Authorised Representative (AR) on behalf of the Assessee and by Shri Mukesh Jain, Departmental Representative (DR) on behalf of the Revenue.
The main issue raised in this appeal is with regard to alleged failure of the assessee in deduction of tax at source while making the payment by the assessee and its consequent disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia).
3.1. Though, during the course of hearing appeal was heard on merits, but subsequently it has been brought to our notice that recently Central Board of Direct Taxes had issued Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 providing that the revenue is not permitted to file an appeal wherein tax effect involved is of less than Rs 10,00,000/-.
3.2. It is noted by us that tax effect in this case is apparently less than Rs. 10,00,000/-.
3.3. We have gone through the aforesaid circular of the Board. It has been provided in the aforesaid circular that no appeal shall be filed by the Revenue if the tax effect involved in the 3 Pratik Builders & Estate Developers P. L. appeal does not exceed a sum of Rs. 10 Lacs. It has further been provided that instructions contained therein shall apply retrospectively to pending appeals also. Relevant part of the circular is reproduced below:
“10. This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunal. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/ not pressed.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.”
3.4. It is further noted by us from the order of Ld. CIT(A) that tax effect in this case is less than the amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. As per law, circular of CBDT has binding effect on the income tax authorities.
3.5. In view of the above, we find that the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable. Therefore, we dismiss the same.
3.6. However, with a view to follow principles of natural justice, we give liberty to the Revenue to file Miscellaneous Application u/s 254 in case tax effect is found to be more than Rs. 10,00,000/-.
4 Pratik Builders & Estate Developers P. L. 4. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order was pronounced in the open court at the conclusion of hearing of this case.