THE ITO, WARD-1(3), JAMNAGAR vs. SHRI JITENDRA BABULAL RATDA, JAMNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 63/RJT/2019Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 November 2023AY 2013-14Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was filed against a low tax effect, which was below the prescribed limit for departmental appeals. The appeal did not fall within the exceptions provided in the relevant CBDT circular.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The total tax effect of the appeal was Rs. 43,49,053.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the low tax effect, in light of CBDT instructions and Section 268A of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Respondent: Shri K.L. Solanki, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

1.

This Revenue’s appeal for A.Y. 2013-14, arises from order of the CIT(A), Jamnagar dated 22-01-2019, in proceedings under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.

Page No 2 ITO vs. Shri Jindendra Babulal Ratda

3.

At the outset, it is observed that the total tax effect of the appeal filed by the Department is Rs. 43,49,053/-, which is below the prescribed limit for filing of appeal by the Department.

4.

We find that the appeal of the Revenue is presented on 27.3.2019. On 8.8.2019 the CBDT has issued Instructions bearing No. 17 of 2019 prohibiting its subordinate authorities from filing of the appeal to the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A) where the tax effect by virtue of the relief given by the CIT(A) is less than Rs.50 lakhs. The instructions have been made applicable with retrospective effect, meaning thereby, these instructions are applicable on pending appeals also. In the present case, “tax effect” on the total income assessed minus the tax that would have been chargeable had such total income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of the issue against which appeal is filed, is less than Rs.50 lakhs. Further, the case of the Revenue does not fall within the ambit of exceptions provided in the Circular. Thus, keeping in view the above CBDT circular and provisions of section 268A of the Income Tax Act, we are of the view that the present appeal of the Revenue deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed.

4.1 However, it is observed that in case on re-verification at the end of the AO it comes to the notice that the tax effect is more or Revenue’s case falls within the ambit of exceptions provided in the Circular, then the Department will be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recall of this order. Such application should be filed within the time period prescribed in the Act. In Page No 3 ITO vs. Shri Jindendra Babulal Ratda view of the above, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08-11-2023

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →