2015 (12) TMI 1732 - HC - Income Tax

Maintainability of appeal - monetary limit - Held that - Since the tax effect in this appeal is ₹ 15,32,504/- and since the monetary limit of ₹ 20 lakhs is fixed for filing appeals before the High Court by the Department as per Circular which has been issued with retrospective effect and as Mr. Dudhoria submits that he has no written instruction from the Department for withdrawing this appeal, as the said Circular, in view of Section 119(1) is binding on the departmental authority, the appeal is treated to be dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding eligibility for deduction under Section 10B of the Act.

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Calcutta involved an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, focusing on the eligibility of the assessee for deduction under Section 10B of the Act. The substantial question of law in question was whether the Tribunal erred in law by reversing the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and assessing officer, thereby holding that the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 10B. The crux of the matter was whether the assessee had fulfilled the necessary requirements for availing the deduction under Section 10B, such as manufacturing or producing any article or thing, being an approved 100% export-oriented unit by the Board of Central Government, and ensuring that the business was not formed by splitting up or reconstruction of a pre-existing business.

The respondent's advocate argued that the tax effect in the appeal was &8377;15,32,504, falling below the monetary limit of &8377;20 lakhs set by Circular No. 21 of 2015 issued by the CBDT. This circular, with retrospective effect, specified the monetary limit for filing cases before the High Court. As the appeal did not meet the exceptions outlined in the circular, it was suggested that the matter should be disposed of in accordance with the circular's provisions.

On the other hand, the appellant's advocate highlighted that despite the tax effect being below the monetary limit, he had no written instruction from the Commissioner of Income Tax to withdraw the appeal. However, he acknowledged that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were binding on the department as per Section 119(1) of the Act.

Given the circumstances where the tax effect was &8377;15,32,504, falling below the prescribed monetary limit of &8377;20 lakhs for filing appeals before the High Court, and the appellant's lack of written instructions for withdrawal, the Court, in line with the Circular and the binding nature of Section 119(1), treated the appeal as dismissed. Importantly, the Court clarified that the dismissal order was made solely based on the Circular's provisions, without delving into the merits of the case.