9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 93 - AT - Income TaxMaintainability of appeal Tax effect less than prescribed monetary limit for filing appeal Tax effect less than ₹ 4 lacs Revision of monetary limits through circular - Held that - Following the decision in CIT Vs M/s. P. S. Jain & Co. 2010 (8) TMI 702 - Delhi High Court - the Board has rightly taken a decision not to file references if the tax effect less than the amount prescribed - The same policy for old matters needs to be adopted by the Department - Instruction No.5/2014 FNo279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) dated 10th July, 2014 will apply to pending appeals also for the reason that the same is exactly identical to earlier instructions - also in The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Smt. Vijaya V. Kavekar 2013 (2) TMI 451 - Bombay High Court it has been held that the applicability of circular was considered and the monetary limit was increased and appeals were to be filed only in cases where the tax effect exceeded ₹ 4 Lacs - no appeals would be filed in the cases involving tax effect less than ₹ 4 Lacs notwithstanding the issue being of recurring nature - the prevailing instructions fixing the monetary limit for the tax effect would hold good even for pending cases revenue could not point out any of the exceptions - this being a low tax effect case, the appeal cannot be admitted Decided against revenue.
Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of the Revenue's appeal based on the prescribed monetary limits for filing appeals before ITAT. 2. Applicability of CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 to pending appeals filed before 10.07.2014. 3. Exceptions to the applicability of the monetary limits as per the CBDT instructions. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Maintainability of the Revenue's Appeal Based on the Prescribed Monetary Limits: The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal, which had a tax effect below Rs. 4 lakhs, was maintainable in light of the CBDT's Instruction No. 5/2014. The Instruction revised the monetary limit for filing appeals before ITAT to Rs. 4 lakhs. The total quantum of addition in the appeal was Rs. 7,63,828/-, resulting in a tax effect below Rs. 4 lakhs. The assessee's counsel argued that the appeal should be dismissed as it did not meet the monetary threshold. The Revenue's counsel contended that the Instruction was prospective and did not apply to appeals filed before 10.07.2014. 2. Applicability of CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 to Pending Appeals Filed Before 10.07.2014: The tribunal examined judicial precedents, including the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in CIT Vs M/s. P. S. Jain & Co. and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in CIT v. Sureshchandra Durgaprasad Khatod (HUF). Both courts held that similar CBDT instructions applied retrospectively to pending appeals. The tribunal noted that the objective of such instructions was to reduce pending litigation where the tax effect was minimal. The tribunal concluded that the recent Instruction No. 5/2014, which raised the monetary limit to Rs. 4 lakhs, should also apply to pending appeals, including those filed before 10.07.2014. 3. Exceptions to the Applicability of the Monetary Limits as per the CBDT Instructions: The tribunal considered whether any exceptions outlined in the CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 applied to the present case. The exceptions included cases involving: (a) Loss cases with a tax effect exceeding the prescribed limit. (b) Composite orders involving multiple assessment years with a cumulative tax effect exceeding the limit. (c) Cases challenging the constitutional validity of provisions of the Act or IT Rules. (d) Cases where a Board's order, Notification, Instruction, or Circular had been held illegal or ultra vires. (e) Cases with accepted Revenue Audit Objections under challenge. The CIT-DR could not point out any of these exceptions in the present case. Consequently, the tribunal found no justification to proceed with the appeal, given the low tax effect and the absence of applicable exceptions. Conclusion: The tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal in limine, citing the low tax effect and the applicability of CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 to pending appeals. The assessee's Cross Objection was also dismissed as not pressed. The order was pronounced in open court on 10.10.2014.
|
