What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit stipulated by CBDT instructions. Therefore, the appeals filed by the Revenue 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 for filing appeals before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether appeals filed by the Revenue are maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circulars.

ITO vs Deepali J Shah | ITAT Mumbai 2015

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘D’ MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri D. Karunakar Rao

Hearing: 29/12/2015

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Joginder Singh(Judicial Member) Both these appeals are by the Revenue challenging the impugned order both dated 26/02/2014 passed by the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

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 consented to be correct by the ld. DR.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We note that the tax effect in the respective appeal is below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs.10 lakh.

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.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, these appeals of the Revenue are not maintainable. Therefore, in view of uncontroverted contention of the ld. DR and the aforementioned circular 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 the ld. representative from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 29/12/2015. Sd/- Sd/- (D. Karunakar Rao) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य /JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 29/12/2015 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/.�न.स.

ITO 25(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. DEEPALI J SHAH, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments