ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELHI HOSPITAL SUPPLY (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1415/DEL/2012Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 January 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 CBDT circulars are binding on revenue authorities. Since the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit, the appeal filed by the Department was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Department filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee pointed out that the tax effect in the appeal was below Rs. 10 lakhs, which, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, meant the revenue should not prefer such appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed by the revenue is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

N/A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI A.T.VARKEY & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Respondent: Adv Sh. Shailesh Gupta, Adv
Hearing: 12.01.2016Pronounced: 19.01.2016

O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M.

1.

This is an appeal filed by the Department is directed against the order dated 03.01.2012 of ld CIT(A)-III, New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2008-09.

2.

At the outset of the hearing itself, the ld. AR brought to our attention that CBDT vide Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 has decided that the revenue would not prefer an appeal before the Tribunal if the tax effect is less than Rs.10 lakhs. He has also filed the computation to show that the tax effect in this case is below Rs.10 lakhs. Therefore, he pleaded that the appeal of the revenue be dismissed as per the instruction of the CBDT and also submitted that the cross objection preferred by the assessee is not pressed.

3.

Ld. DR was fair enough to admit the aforesaid factual position.

4.

We have heard both the sides on the issue and perused the material. I find that the CBDT vide circular dated 10.12.2015 has revised the monetary limit [1]

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →