What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect in the appeals was below the monetary limit specified by the CBDT. Consequently, the appeals were not maintainable.

The Revenue filed appeals against the orders of the First Appellate Authority. The tax effect in both appeals was below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 10 lakh for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeals were maintainable before the ITAT given the low tax effect, as per CBDT instructions.

ITO vs Kiran M Panchal | ITAT Mumbai 2016

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

Hearing: 01/02/2016

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) Both these appeals are by the Revenue, aggrieved by the impugned order dated 02/08/2012, of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

During hearing of these appeals, nobody was present on behalf of the assessee. At the outset, it was brought to our notice that the tax effect in the respective appeal is below prescribed monetary limit. This factual matrix was not controverted by the ld. DR, Shri G.N. Makwana.

2.1.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noted that for assessment year 2006-07, the demand of tax is Rs.5,94,792/- whereas, for. A.Y. 2007-08, the demand is Rs.4,38,748/-, which is below prescribed limit of Rs.10 lakh for filing the appeal before the Tribunal.

2.2.

In view of the fact that the tax effect in the respective appeal is below prescribed monetary limit, as contained in CBDT instruction No.21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT), with retrospective effect and advised/directed the Department 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.

Before ITAT 10,00,000/-

U/s 260 A before Hon’ble High 20,00,000/- Court

Before Hon’ble Supreme Court 25,00,000/-

As per the aforesaid instruction/revised monetary limit, the Department is not to file appeal before the Tribunal, wherein, the tax effect is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, consequently, the appeals of the Revenue are not maintainable. Therefore, in view of uncontroverted contention of the ld. DR and the aforementioned Circular no. 21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT), of CBDT, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as not maintainable. Finally, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as not maintainable. This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. DR at the conclusion of the hearing on 01/02/2016. (G.S. Pannu) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद"य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated : 01/02/2016 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/."न.स. आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु"त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai

"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"या"पत ""त //// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

ITO 25(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. KIRAN M PANCHAL, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments