ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI VIJAY PAL GARG, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2868/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 February 2016AY 2007-083 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 Revenue's appeal was not maintainable due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. Consequently, the assessee's cross-objection, which supported the CIT(A)'s order, was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting disallowances related to personal use expenses and an addition of unsecured loans. The tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit. The impact of CBDT circulars on pending appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI L.P. SAHU

For Respondent: DR Assessee by : Sh. Gautam Jain, CA

Date of Hearing : 08-02-2016 Date of Order : 08-02-2016

ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. The Department has filed this Appeal and Assessee has filed the Cross Objection which is emanate from the Order dated 19.2.2013 of Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2007-08. The grounds raised in the revenue’s appeal reads as under:-

“1. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts.

2.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of expenses for personal use of Rs. 22,759/-.

3.

On the facts and in the circumstances and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- made u/s. 68 of unsecured loan received. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any / all the grounds of appeal

before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.

2. We find that Revenue in the Grounds of Appeal before the Tribunal has challenged the deletion of addition of Rs. 22,759/- vide ground no. 1 and Rs. 10,00,000/- vide ground no. 2, 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 (in S No Appeals in Income-tax matters 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.”

4.

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, 5. 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. ASSESSEE’S CROSS OBJECTION 6. As far as Assessee’s Cross Objection is concerned, the same is only supportive the Ld. CIT(A)’s order. Since we have dismissed the Appeal of the Revenue as aforesaid, hence, the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee has become infructuous and dismissed as such. 7. In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal as well as Assessee’s Cross Objection stand dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 08/02/2016.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →