2001 (8) TMI 1331 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
The single issue in the 29 appeals by the Revenue pertains to the justification of filing appeals based on monetary limits set by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

Comprehensive Details:

Justification of Filing Appeals:
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal issued a notice regarding revised monetary limits for filing appeals. The circular emphasized that appeals should only be filed if the tax effect exceeds the specified limits. The Revenue was directed to justify appeals not exceeding the revised monetary limits. Despite the circular, appeals were filed in insignificant matters with nominal tax amounts, violating the circular's purpose. The circulars of the Central Board of Direct Taxes are binding on all authorities under section 119 of the Act. The Tribunal requested the Revenue to show cause for filing appeals below the monetary limits.

The Revenue failed to respond within the stipulated time. During the hearing, the Departmental Representative sought an adjournment to seek clarification from the Central Board of Direct Taxes. However, the Tribunal declined the adjournment request, emphasizing the binding nature of the circular's instructions. The Departmental Representative argued that the circular was for internal use and did not affect statutory appeal rights. The Tribunal disagreed, stating that the circular aimed to avoid unnecessary litigation in small cases, benefiting small assessees.

The Departmental Representative contended that certain cases fell under exceptions outlined in the circular, but failed to provide evidence. The Tribunal noted that the appeals were filed routinely, disregarding the circular's instructions. Referring to past judgments, the Tribunal emphasized the binding nature of Central Board of Direct Taxes' circulars on income-tax authorities. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, stating they were filed contrary to the Board's instructions without justification.

In conclusion, all appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed for being contrary to the Central Board of Direct Taxes' instructions on monetary limits for filing appeals.