What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the CBDT Circular No. F. No. 279/ Misc.142/207 ITJ(Pt) dated 10th December, 2015, which mandates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10,00,000/- should not be filed or pressed. Accordingly, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as not pressed.

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2007-08, and the assessee filed a cross-objection. Both parties submitted that the tax effect involved was less than Rs. 10,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed based on the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular.

DCIT vs M/S. Aggarwal Entertainment Pvt… | ITAT Delhi 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R. S. SYAL & SMT SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Respondent: Shri A.K. Jain, C.A

Hearing: 06.01.2016Pronounced: 07.01.2016

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA NO.3444/DEL/13

CO.203/DEL/13

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order dated 28/3/2013, passed by the ld. CIT(A)-III, New Delhi, relating to A.Y.

2007-08 and Assessee has filed cross objection against the revenue’s appeal on the similar question.

The Ld. DR as well as the Ld. AR submitted that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than 10,00,000/-.

3. CBDT Circular No. F. No. 279/ Misc.142/207 ITJ(Pt) dated 10th December, 2015, in Para 3, 7 and 10 reads as under:

Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder:

S No. Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/-

………

In the past, a number of instances have come to the notice of the Board, whereby an assessee has claimed relief from the Tribunal or the Court only on the ground that the Department has implicitly accepted the decision of the Tribunal or Court in the case of the assessee for any other assessment year or in the case of any other assessee for the same or any other assessment year, by not filing an appeal on the same disputed

issues. The Departmental representative/counsels must make every effort to bring to the notice of the Tribunal or the Court that the appeal in such cases was not filed or not admitted only for the reason of the tax effect being less that the specified monetary limit and, therefore, no inference should be drawn that the decisions rendered therein were acceptable to the Department. Accordingly, they should impress upon the Tribunal or the Court that such cases do not have any precedent value. a the evidence of not filing appeal due to this instruction may have to be produced in courts, the judicial folders in the office of CsIT must be maintained in a systemic manner for easy retrieval.

…….

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.”

Thus, this being a pending appeal is covered by the CBDT Circular No. F. No. 279/ Misc.142/207 ITJ(Pt) dated 10th December, 2015. The Ld. DR submitted that this appeal be dismissed as not pressed. The Ld. AR submitted that in light of dismissal of the Revenue’s appeal, cross objection filed by the assessee is not pressed

Considering the submissions of both the parties, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed as not pressed. However, this dismissal of Revenue’s appeal will not hold as precedence in subsequent proceedings.

In result, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed by the Revenue and cross objection is also dismissed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 7th of January, 2016.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. AGGARWAL ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD., 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