9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 412 - AT - Income TaxRectification u/s 254 - Maintainability of appeal on low tax effect - non-consideration of subsequent CBDT Circular and the special order so passed by the CBDT - HELD THAT - CBDT Circular dated 16.09.2019 is by way of a special order and the appeal has been directed to be filed by virtue of such special order has apparently not been considered in other cases relied upon by the Revenue in case of Satish M Patel 2020 (2) TMI 1436 - ITAT AHMEDABAD and Ambrish Chandra Sharma 2020 (2) TMI 1435 - ITAT AHMEDABAD We find that the decision in said cases has also been guided by the concession by the ld A/R on behalf of the assessee to go for the tax settlement scheme and we therefore, find that the said decisions doesn t support the case of the Revenue. Further, we find that both CBDT Circular no. 23 of 2019 and special order dated 16.09.2019 were not in existence and thus not part of the record at the time when the matter was heard on 20.08.2019 or at the time of passing of order by the Tribunal on 22.08.2019 and therefore, non-consideration of subsequent CBDT Circular and the special order so passed by the CBDT is not a mistake apparent from record which can be rectified within the narrow compass of section 254(2) of the Act.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of CBDT Circulars regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. 2. Application of special orders by CBDT exempting certain cases from monetary limits. 3. Consideration of subsequent CBDT Circulars and special orders in pending appeals. Analysis: Issue 1: Interpretation of CBDT Circulars regarding monetary limits for filing appeals The Revenue filed a miscellaneous application against a Tribunal order, arguing that the order was unacceptable as it did not appreciate the findings of the Assessing Officer (AO) based on information from the Investigation Unit and SEBI. The Revenue contended that despite the tax effect being below the limit for filing appeals specified by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, the order should be recalled under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing CBDT Circular No. 23 of 2019. The Assessing Officer argued that the appeal was correctly dismissed due to low tax effect based on CBDT Circular dated 8.08.2019, which increased the monetary limit for maintaining appeals. Issue 2: Application of special orders by CBDT exempting certain cases from monetary limits The Assessing Officer further argued that the subsequent CBDT Circular No. 23 of 2019, along with a special order communicated on 16.09.2019, exempted cases involving penny stocks from monetary limits for filing appeals. The Tribunal referred to a similar case before the Jaipur Bench, where it was held that the special order exempting certain cases from monetary limits must be issued by the CBDT for appeals to be filed on merits. The Tribunal emphasized that the appeal in question was filed before the special order was issued and, therefore, did not fall under the exception prescribed by the CBDT Circulars. Issue 3: Consideration of subsequent CBDT Circulars and special orders in pending appeals The Tribunal highlighted that the subsequent CBDT Circular No. 23 of 2019 and the special order dated 16.09.2019 were not in existence at the time of the original Tribunal order. It was emphasized that the non-consideration of these subsequent circulars and special orders was not a mistake apparent from the record that could be rectified under section 254(2) of the Act. The Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue, stating that it was not maintainable in light of the discussion regarding the interpretation and application of CBDT Circulars and special orders in pending appeals. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the original order dismissing the Revenue's appeal due to low tax effect and emphasized the importance of considering subsequent CBDT Circulars and special orders in determining the applicability of monetary limits for filing appeals.
|
