What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 10 lakh for filing appeals before the ITAT. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue was not maintainable.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee remained unrepresented. The tax effect in the appeal was below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT instructions.

ACIT vs Jayabharat Credit Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

Hearing: 21/03/2016

आदेश / O R D E R Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member)

The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 10/06/2015 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

During hearing of this appeal, none was present for the assessee in spite of issuance of registered AD notice. It seems that the assessee is not interested to represent the appeal, therefore, we have no option but to proceed ex- parte qua the assessee. However, at the outset, it was brought to our notice that the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed monetary limit. This factual matrix was not controverted by the ld. DR, Shri M. Murli.

2.1. We have considered the submissions of the ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed monetary limit of Rs.10 lakh for filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The CBDT issued instruction No.21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007- IT(PT), applicable with retrospective effect, wherein, the Department was advised/directed by the Board not to file appeal in the cases where the tax effect does not exceed the following monetary limit.:-

Sl. Appeals in Income –tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) No. 1. Before ITAT 10,00,000/- 2. U/s 260 A before Hon’ble High 20,00,000/- Court 3. Before Hon’ble Supreme Court 25,00,000/- Since, the tax effect is below prescribed monetary limit, the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable. Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. This order was pronounced in the open in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 21/03/2016.

Sd/- Sd/- (Rajendra) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 21/03/2016 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/.�न.स. आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant (Respective assessee) 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai, 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file.

ACIT 10(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. JAYABHARAT CREDIT LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments