Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM
PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: This appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) 8, Mumbai dated 28.04.2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. At the time of hearing, it was noticed that the tax effect involved in this appeal on the disputed issues is less than Rs.10 lakhs. For the sake of convenience, we tabulate below the relevant details:- A.Y. 2010-11
S.No. Name of assessee Amount in Penalty deleted or dispute(for reduced by Ld quantum appeal) CIT(A) In Rs. in Rs. 1 M/s. Prime Broking Co. (I) Ltd. 12,01,850/- --
We notice that the revenue is contesting the decision of Ld CIT(A) in granting relief to the extent stated above and hence the tax effect involved on the above said disputed amounts works out to less than Rs.10 lakhs. Recently the CBDT has issued a circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 prescribing new monetary limits for preferring appeals against the orders passed by Ld CIT(A) before the Tribunal. The relevant portion of the circular cited above reads as under:
“F No 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt) Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board Direct Taxes Circular No. 21/2015 New Delhi the 10th December, 2015 Sub :Revision of monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before Supreme Court - measures for reducing litigation – Reg Reference is invited to Board's instruction No 5/2014 dated 10.07.2014 wherein monetary limits and other conditions for filing departmental appeals (in Income-tax matters) before Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court were specified.
In supersession of the above instruction, it has been decided by the Board that departmental appeals may be filed on merits before Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court keeping in view the monetary limits and conditions specified below.
2 A.Y. 2010-11
Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: S No Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (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.
For this purpose, "tax effect" means the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had such total income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of the issues against which appeal is intended to be filed (hereinafter referred to as "disputed issues"). However the tax will not include any interest thereon, except where chargeability of interest itself is in dispute. In case the chargeability of interest is the issue under dispute, the amount of interest shall be the tax effect. In cases where returned loss is reduced or assessed as income, the tax effect would include notional tax on disputed additions. In case of penalty orders, the tax effect will mean quantum of penalty deleted or reduced in the order to be appealed against.
………. 6……… 7. …… 8. ……. 9. …..
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.”
3 A.Y. 2010-11
…..” It can be noticed that the CBDT has further clarified that this new circular/instruction shall apply retrospectively, i.e., even to the pending appeals. It is also stated that the quantum of penalty deleted or reduced shall be considered for determining the monetary limits.
It is well settled proposition that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the Income Tax Authorities. For this proposition, one may gainfully refer to the decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003)(177 Taxation 775) and Pradip J Mehta Vs. CIT (2008)(300 ITR 231). Hence, the latest circular issued by the CBDT (referred supra) is binding on the income tax authorities. Accordingly, we find merit in the submissions of Ld A.R that this appeal of the revenue is not maintainable, since tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.10 lakhs. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue.
Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 15th January, 2016 (B.R.BASKARAN) (AMARJIT SINGH) लेखा सद" / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "ाियक सद"/JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांक Dated : 15th January, 2016 MP
4 A.Y. 2010-11
आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant
""थ" / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु"(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आयु" / CIT 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"ािपत "ित //// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.