ITO, WARD-24(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANUPAMA GUPTA, NEW DELHI,

ITA 2391/DEL/2006Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 December 2015AY 2001-024 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 the CBDT circular prescribing monetary limits for appeals is binding on the revenue authorities. Since the tax effect was below the stipulated limit, the appeal should have been withdrawn or not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Department filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee argued that the appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular. The Department did not controvert this submission.

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 a binding CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not Applicable

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI O.P. KANT

This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 4.4.2006 of Ld. CIT(A)-XXIII, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2001-02.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Authorised Representative of the Assessee, Sh. G.C. Agarwal, CA, has stated that the tax effect in this Appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, therefore, the Department’s Appeal is not maintainable, in view of the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) by the CBDT. He further stated that in this Appeal the tax effect (penaly) amount is Rs. 5,63,589/- and the same is the amount of additional tax on additions of Rs. 15,89,084/-.

Ld. DR, Shri T. Vasanthan, did not controvert the submissions of the Ld. Authorised Representative for the assessee, but he relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. For the sake of convenience, the relevant para nos. 3 & 10 of the aforesaid CBDT’s Circular are reproduced as under:- “3. Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: Monetary Limit S No Appeals in Income-tax matters (in Rs) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.

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.”

It is not in dispute that the Board’s instruction or directions issued to the income-tax authorities are binding on those authorities, therefore, the Department should have withdrawn/ not pressed the present Appeal, in view of the aforesaid instructions since the tax effect in the instant Appeal is less than the amount of Rs. 10 lacs, prescribed in the above said CBDT’s Instructions.

Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, we are of the view that the Revenue should have withdrawn/ not pressed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. We are also of the view that the said Instructions are applicable for the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in Tribunal.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16/12/2015.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →