ITO 8(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BIECRETE PROJECTS P.LTD, MUMBAI

At the outset, it is noticed that in both assessment years the quantum of penalty levied by AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is amounting to Rs.7,21,010/- in AY 2003-04 and amounting to Rs.4,79,128/- in AY 2004-05. We find that the quantum of penalty disputed before us is below the tax effect limit prescribed by CBDT vide Circular No. 21 / 2015 dated 10.12.2015 for preferring appeals before tribunal by the revenue. On perusal of the Circular No. 21 / 2015 dated 10.12.2015 and the materials available on record, Ld. DR could not point out whether these cases fall under any of the exception as provided in the circular despite specific opportunity was given. In view of this, these appeals do not fall under any of the exceptions contemplated in the said Circular, and hence, this is covered by this circular. We also find that the Circular makes it very clear that the revised monetary limits shall apply retrospectively to pending appeals also. We find that the Circular is binding on the tax authorities. This position has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd reported in 267 ITR 272 (SC). Hence, we hold that both the appeals of the revenue deserve to be dismissed in terms of low tax effect vide Circular No.21 / 2015 dated 10.12.2015. Accordingly, these being low tax effect cases, we dismiss both these appeals of revenue in limine, as unadmitted, without going into the merits of the case.

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd March, 2016.