ITO,WD-12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RAMESWARA NIKET SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material records. As pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset, the tax effect involved in each of these four appeals preferred by the Revenue is less than the monetary limit of Rs. 3 lakhs fixed by the CBDT vide Instruction no.3/2011 dated 09.02.2011 for filing the appeals before the Tribunal and this position clearly 2 to 301/Kol/2014 M/s. Rameswara Niket Services Pvt.Ltd. Assessment Year: 2006-07 to 2009-10 evident from the working filed by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is not disputed even by the ld. DR. Under section 268A(1) inserted in the Statute by the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1999, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has been authorized to issue orders, instructions or directions to the income-tax authorities laying down the monetary limits for the purpose of filing appeals. As held by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT- vs- Oskar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. 324 ITR 115, consequent to the insertion of section 268A in the Income-Tax Act, 1961, orders, instructions or directions issued on the subject of monetary limits for filing the appeals must be deemed to have attained statutory status and there can be no dispute that every requirement under the mandate of law leads to a consequential statutory obligation to comply with the requirement. In the case of Oskar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. (supra) before the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, the appeal filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal involved the tax effect of less than the monetary limit prescribed in the instruction issued by the CBDT and the said appeal was held to be not maintainable by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court relying on the provisions of section 268A(1) of the Act.