What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit for filing appeals before the ITAT as per CBDT instructions. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable.

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee's counsel pointed out that the tax effect in the appeal was below the prescribed monetary limit. The Revenue's counsel consented to this fact.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue was maintainable given that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit set by the CBDT.

DCIT vs Residency Foods Beverages Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2016

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

Before: Shri Joginder Singh,

For Respondent: Shri A.K.Dhondial JCIT-DR, Shri Dharmesh Shah

Hearing: 07/01/2016

आदेश / O R D E R

The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 20/02/2015 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

At the outset, it was pointed out by the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Dharmesh Shah, that the tax effect in M/s Residency Foods & Beverages Ltd.

the present appeal is below prescribed monetary limit. This factual matrix was consented to be correct by the ld. DR, Shri A.K. Dhondial.

2.1. I have considered the submissions and perused the material available on record. I note that total income computed by the Assessing Officer is Rs.11,62,978/-, thus, the tax effect is below prescribed monetary limit. On questioning by the Bench from the ld. DR with respect to tax effect, it was fairly consented by him that the tax effect in the present appeal is below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs.10 lakh. It is also noted that the ld. First Appellate Authority granted relief to the assessee deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer and decided the appeal in favour of the assessee.

2.2. In view of the fact that the tax effect in the present appeal is below prescribed monetary limit, as contained in CBDT instruction No.3/2011 dated 09/02/2011, further instruction No.5/2014 (F No.279/Misc./142/2007-IT(PT) dated 10/07/2014, the CBDT revised the monetary limit for filing the appeal before various Authorities/Courts vide CBDT Circular 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.:-

M/s Residency Foods & Beverages Ltd.

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/-

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, this appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable. Therefore, in view of uncontroverted contention of the ld. DR with respect to prescribed monetary limit and the aforementioned circular of CBDT, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. This order was pronounced in the open Court in the presence of ld. representative from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 07/01/2016.

DCIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RESIDENCY FOODS BEVERAGES LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments