I.T.O., WARD-1(1), ALIGARH vs. SH. SUMIT JUNEJA, ALIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 346/AGR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 October 2017AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine without going into the merits. This was based on a CBDT circular directing that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10 lacs should not be filed or pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT for AY 2011-12. The tax effect on the disputed income was less than Rs. 10 lacs.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular, despite the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (SMC

Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, AR
For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR, Shri Rajeev Kumar, AR
Hearing: 25.10.2017Pronounced: 25.10.2017

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA

BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A No. 346/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011-12)

ITO (AO) Ward-1(1), Vs..Shri Sumit Juneja, Aligarh. H. No. 6, City Enclave, Aligarh. PAN No.ADEPJ7523L (Assessee) (Revenue)

Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR. Assessee by Shri Rajeev Kumar, AR.

Date of Hearing 25.10.2017 Date of Pronouncement 25.10.2017

ORDER This is Department’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, 2. I note that in this appeal filed by the Revenue, the tax effect on the income in dispute is less than Rs.10 lacs.

3.

I further note that the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 file no. 279 of Misc. 142/2007 - ITJ (PT), has issued the direction, in supersession of the Instruction No.5/2014 dated 10.07.2014,

in pursuance of the power entrusted u/s 268A of the Income Tax Act, that no appeal should be filed before this Tribunal in case the tax effect does not exceed

I.T.A No. 346/Agra/2016 2

Rs.10 lac. The "tax effect" in this regard 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 issues against

which appeal is intended to be filed. This Circular further states that tax will not

include any interest thereon, unless the chargeability of interest itself is in dispute.

I further note that under paragraph 10, which is reproduced as under, it has been

mentioned in the Circular that this instruction will apply even to the pending

appeals:

"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."

4.

I note that the tax effect on the issue under dispute in the appeal does not

exceed Rs.10 lac. In view of this fact, as per the CBDT Circular No.21 dated

10.12.2015, the Revenue is not supposed to press this appeal. I, therefore, dismiss

the appeal filed by the revenue in limine without going into the merits of the case,

as the Circular issued by the CBDT is binding on the departmental officers in view

of the provisions of Section 268A(1) of the Income Tax Act. The said view has

I.T.A No. 346/Agra/2016 3

been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Navneet Lal Zaveri’, 56 ITR 198 (SC). I, accordingly, dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25/10/2017.

Sd/-

(A.D. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 25/10/2017 *AKV* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →