9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 784X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e open to the Department to bring the said fact to the notice of the Court or the Tribunal so that the appropriate Authority/Court applies its mind to the necessity of formulating the question for rendering decision thereon - Decided against the revenue. - IT APPEAL NO. 205 OF 2007 - - - Dated:- 1-3-2011 - SHANTANU KEMKAR AND ABHAY M. NAIK, JJ. ORDER 1. Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ms. Veena Mandlik, learned counsel for the appellant. In this appeal following substantial questions of law have been raised: "1. Whether the ITAT was justified in dismissing the departmental appeal without considering that the Board has also directed that cases involving substantial question of law of importance should be conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained in paragraph 3 which reads as follows: "(3) The Board has also decided that in cases involving substantial question of law of importance as well as in cases where the same question of law will repeatedly arise, either in the case concerned or in similar cases, should be separately considered on merits without being hindered by the monetary limits." 3. This appeal has been filed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal declining to decide the appeal on merit on the ground that the tax effect in the case was less than Rs. 2,00,000 and, therefore, the appeal was contrary to the explicit instructions of the Board of Direct Taxes to the effect that where the tax effect was less than 2,00,000, appeal should not be filed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Court or even the assessee. 4. We have considered the contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel. Before considering the cases cited by the learned Senior Counsel, we may point out that a Division Bench of this Court has held in CIT v. Suresh Chand Goyal [2007] 163 Taxman 54 that in cases where tax effect is below 2,00,000, revenue cannot file appeal contrary to the in terms of Circular which is binding on the Department. The relevant discussion contained in paragraph 16 of the said report reads as extracted below: "16. The another question raised by learned Counsel for the respondent is about the filing of appeal contrary to the circular issued by the C.B.D.T., according to which, the appeal under section 260A of the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s involving substantial question of law of importance as well as cases where the same question of law will repeatedly arise either in the case concerned or in similar cases that the Department will not be hindered by the monetary limits. The question, therefore, arises as to whether the Department can be left at liberty to defeat the Circular of CBDT restraining its power to file appeal in case of the tax effect being below the monetary limit by capriciously taking subterfuge under the specious plea that the case is one of the excepted category of cases. It has not been brought to our notice that the Income-tax Department has devised any procedure to consider whether a particular case falls within the excepted category thus, permitting the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
