2013 (6) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fect in the instant appeal is less than Rs. 4,00,000/- appeal need to be rejected.
Rajiv Sharma And Dr. Satish Chandra,JJ. For the Appellant :- D. D. Chopra, Sanjeev Shankhdhar For the Respondent : Rohit Nandan Shukla ORDER Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records. Through the instant appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act-1961, the appellant challenges th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ope of mistake apparent from record. III. Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in recalling their order dated 27.7.2007 without appreciating that recalling of order necessitates rehearing, re-adjudication and passing of fresh order. IV. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eference before the High Court where the revenue effect is less than Rs. 4,00,000/-. It has been pointed out by Mr. Shukla that the instruction issued by the Board fixing monetary limits for filing appeal and application for reference shall be deemed to have been issued under sub-section (1) of section 268A of the Income-tax Act in view of the provision made in section 268A(5) of the Act. Hence, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X