9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 592 - AT - Income TaxMainatainability of appeal - tax effect in the appeal filed by the Department is less than the amount prescribed by the CBDT - Held that - Board s instruction or directions issued to the other income-tax authorities are binding on those authorities, therefore, the Department ought not to have filed the appeal in view of the above mentioned sect ion 268A since the tax effect in the instant case is less than the amount prescribed for not filing the appeal - CBDT has issued Instruction No.3 of 2011 dated 09.02.2011, by which the CBDT has revised the monetary limit to ₹ 3,00,000/ - for filing the appeal before the Tribunal . Keeping in view the CBDT Instruct ion No.3 of 2011 dated 09.02.2011 and also the provisions of Sect ion 268A of Income Tax Act , 1961, we are of the view that the Revenue should not have filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. - Decided against Revenue.
Issues:
1. Appeal filed by the Department against the order of the ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. Whether the tax effect in the appeal is less than the prescribed amount by the CBDT. 3. Applicability of Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. 4. Interpretation of CBDT Instruction No. 3 of 2011 and its impact on filing appeals before the Tribunal. 5. Judicial precedents supporting the view that monetary limits for filing appeals should be adhered to. Analysis: 1. The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was filed by the Department against the order of the ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2004-05. The counsel for the assessee pointed out that the tax effect in the appeal was below the threshold set by the CBDT, indicating that the appeal should not have been filed by the Department. 2. The Department, represented by the Learned D.R., acknowledged that the tax effect in the appeal was indeed less than the prescribed amount by the CBDT. This admission highlighted a crucial point regarding the permissibility of filing such appeals based on monetary limits. 3. Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was brought into consideration, emphasizing the Board's authority to issue orders setting monetary limits for filing appeals. The provision clarified that income-tax authorities should adhere to these limits when deciding to file appeals or applications for reference. 4. The CBDT Instruction No. 3 of 2011 revised the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal to Rs. 3,00,000. By analyzing this instruction along with Section 268A, the Tribunal concluded that the Revenue should not have pursued the appeal in question due to the monetary threshold not being met. 5. The Tribunal referenced judicial decisions from the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, which supported the view that circulars and instructions issued by the CBDT regarding monetary limits for appeals should also apply to pending cases. This legal precedent further strengthened the Tribunal's decision to dismiss the Revenue's appeal based on the prescribed monetary limit. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, citing the CBDT Instruction and Section 268A as the basis for their decision, without delving into the merits of the case. The judgment was pronounced on 20.11.2012 in open court.
|
