What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the prescribed limit for not pressing appeals. Therefore, the revenue was advised to withdraw or not press the appeal.

The revenue's appeal concerned additions made to the assessee's income for AY 2008-09. The tax effect on the disputed additions was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal with a tax effect below the CBDT's prescribed monetary limit should be pursued by the revenue.

A.C.I.T Cir - 30 vs M/S Bells Advertising Syndicates | ITAT Kolkata 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri M. Balaganesh, & Shri S.S Viswanethra Ravi

This appeal of the revenue arises out of the order of the Learned CIT(A)-XIV, Kolkata in Appeal No. 277/CIT(A)-XIV/10-11 dated 13-12-2012 against the order of assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) for the Asst Year 2008-09.

At the outset, it is seen that the tax effect on the disputed additions before us is less than Rs. 10 lacs.

We have heard the ld.DR. In this appeal the total amount involved and tax effect are Rs.22,07,480/- and Rs.7,50,322/- respectively. It is seen from the perusal of the records that the total tax effect on the additions disputed before us is admittedly below the tax effect limit prescribed by CBDT vide Circular No. 21 / 2015 dated 10.12.2015 -C-AM M/s. Advertising Syndicates T.E 1

respect of the year(s) in which ‘tax effect’ exceeds the monetary limit prescribed. In case where a composite order / judgement involves more than one assessee, each assessee shall be dealt with separately.

Adverse judgements relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect:

(a) Where the Constitutional Validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule are under challenge, or (b) Where Board’s order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit Objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets / bank accounts.

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 Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn / not pressed.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.

3.1 We find that intention behind the Circular No.21/2015 dated 10-12-2015 needs to be understood in the following perspective:-

By passage of time, the money value has gone down, the cost of litigation expenses has gone up, number of assesses on the files of the department have been increased and consequently, the burden on the department is also increased to a tremendous extent. The Corridors of the Superior Courts are choked with huge pendency of cases. In this view of the matter, the CBDT has rightly taken a decision to revise the monetary limits in tune with the present value of money and with a view to reduce the litigation and offering relief to small tax payers. This is also in view of the fact that time and energy of the department could be used more productively and efficiently to -C-AM M/s. Advertising Syndicates T.E 3

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant: Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir-30 2 Gariahat Road (S) Kol- 68. 2 The Respondent-M/s. Bells Advertising Syndicates 50A Bibhutibhusan Bandopadhyay Sarani, Ballygunge, Kol-19. 3 /The CIT, 4.The CIT(A)

A.C.I.T CIR - 30,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BELLS ADVERTISING SYNDICATES, KOLKATA

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