ITAT Delhi Judgments — December 2015

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals based on the CBDT Circular which mandates that appeals with a tax effect below the specified monetary limit should not be filed. The dismissal was on the grounds of low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the revenue authorities. Since the tax effect in all appeals was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals based on the CBDT Circular which mandates that appeals with a tax effect below the specified monetary limit should not be filed. The dismissal was on the grounds of low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal solely on the grounds of low tax effect, as per the binding CBDT circular. It clarified that this dismissal would not act as a precedent for cases with a higher tax effect.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals based on the CBDT Circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals. The dismissal was on the grounds of low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the income-tax authorities. Therefore, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals as the tax effect was below the prescribed limit.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which sets a monetary limit of Rs. 10 lakhs for appeals to the ITAT, was applicable retrospectively. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the income-tax authorities. Therefore, appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed limit should not have been filed or should have been withdrawn.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect was below the prescribed limit, the appeal was dismissed.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, relying on CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 10 lac. The dismissal was based on the low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, relying on CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 10 lac. The dismissal was based on the low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal noted that as per CBDT Circular No. F. No. 279/Misc.142/207 ITJ(Pt) dated 10th December, 2015, appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10,00,000/- before the Appellate Tribunal should not be filed or pressed. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not pressed.

The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law due to a lack of independent application of mind by the AO to the information received. Furthermore, the addition made under Section 68 was unsustainable as the assessee had discharged its burden of proof during the original assessment.

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) had not applied his mind to the information received, making the reopening of the assessment bad in law. The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A).

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, relying on CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 10 lac. The dismissal was based on the low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, relying on CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 10 lac. The dismissal was based on the low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw all appeals. Since the Supreme Court's decision on electricity rates rendered the appeals academic, further adjudication was deemed unnecessary.

The Tribunal held that the revised CBDT circular, which sets a monetary limit of ₹10 lakhs for filing appeals to the ITAT, was applicable. The appeals were therefore dismissed based on this circular.

The Tribunal held that the revised CBDT circular, which sets a monetary limit of ₹10 lakhs for filing appeals to the ITAT, was applicable. The appeals were therefore dismissed based on this circular.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals based on the CBDT Circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals. The dismissal was on the grounds of low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals based on the CBDT Circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals. The dismissal was on the grounds of low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals to the ITAT was applicable. The appeals were dismissed based on this circular, with a clarification that this would not set a precedent for future cases with higher tax effects.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT circular, which mandates not filing appeals where the tax effect is below a certain monetary limit, is binding on the Revenue. Consequently, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed on this ground.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the income-tax authorities. Therefore, appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed limit should not have been filed or should have been withdrawn.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue based on a CBDT circular that revised the monetary limit for filing departmental appeals to the ITAT. The circular made these limits applicable retrospectively.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, relying on CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 10 lac. The dismissal was based on the low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals based on the CBDT Circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals. The dismissal was on the grounds of low tax effect and not on merits.

The tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue based on a CBDT circular that revised the monetary limit for filing departmental appeals to the ITAT. The circular made these limits applicable retrospectively.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals to the ITAT was applicable. The appeals were dismissed based on this circular, with a clarification that this would not set a precedent for future cases with higher tax effects.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals based on the CBDT Circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals. The dismissal was on the grounds of low tax effect and not on merits.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 is squarely applicable to the appeal as the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit. The appeal was dismissed in light of the circular.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the revised CBDT circular, which sets a monetary limit of ₹10 lakhs for filing appeals to the ITAT, was applicable. The appeals were therefore dismissed based on this circular.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to the ITAT, was applicable to the present case. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on this ground.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT's circular, issued under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, is binding on the Revenue. Since the tax effect in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the Revenue should not have filed or should have withdrawn these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular is binding on the Revenue and that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit should not be filed. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed on this ground.