What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 10 lakh as per CBDT instructions. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was deemed 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 for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

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

ACIT vs Neeleshwar Developers | ITAT Mumbai 2016

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

Before: Shri Joginder Singh,

For Respondent: Shri Rahul K. Hakani

Hearing: 06/01/2016

आदेश / O R D E R

The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 31/03/2015 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

At the outset, it was pointed out by the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Rahul K. Hakani, that the tax effect in 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 the tax effect in the present appeal is below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs.10 lakh.

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.:-

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 of both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 06/01/2016.

Sd/- (Joginder Singh) �या�यक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 06/01/2016 f{x~{tÜ? P.S /�नजी स�चव आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 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. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy//

ACIT 32(2), MUMBAI vs. NEELESHWAR DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments