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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 298/KOL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 September 2015AY 2006-20073 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were not maintainable as the tax effect was less than the prescribed monetary limit. The CBDT instructions on monetary limits have statutory status due to Section 268A of the Income Tax Act.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed four appeals before the ITAT against the orders of the CIT(A) which treated rental income as business income. The tax effect in each appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether appeals filed by the Revenue are maintainable when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT, considering Section 268A of the Income Tax Act.

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, KOLKATA BENCH ‘SMC’, KOLKATA

Before: Shri P. M. Jagtap

For Appellant: Shri Debasish Lahiri, JCIT, Sr.DR
For Respondent: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Advocate
Hearing: 15.09.2015Pronounced: 15.09.2015

These four appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against the four separate orders all dated 21.11.2013 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-XII, Kolkata dated 11.02.2013 for the assessment year 2006- 07 to 2009-10, whereby he treated the rental income received by the assessee company as its business income as against income from house property as treated by the AO.

2.

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.

2.1 In the present case, the tax effect involved in each of the four appeals filed by the Revenue in the month of February, 2014 is less than the monetary limit of Rs.3 lakhs prescribed by the CBDT vide Instruction dated 09.02.2011 (supra) and the same being in contravention of the said instruction issued by the CBDT which have attained a statutory status as a consequence of the insertion of the section 268A in the Income-Tax Act, 1961 as held by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Oskar Laboratories Pvt. 3 to 301/Kol/2014 M/s. Rameswara Niket Services Pvt.Ltd. Assessment Year: 2006-07 to 2009-10 Ltd., I hold that the same are not maintainable. All these four appeals filed by the Revenue are accordingly dismissed.

7.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 15th September, 2015. Sd/- (P.M.Jagtap) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 15/09/2015 Talukdar/Sr.PS Copy of order forwarded to: 1 M/s. Rameswara Niket Services Pvt. Ltd., Sidha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Gr. Fl., Kolkata – 700 069 2 ITO, Ward-12(3), Kolkata- 69. 3 The CIT(A), 4 CIT, 5. D.R. 5 True Copy, By order,

More judgments on Section 268A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →