9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals are therefore liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. - WTA Nos.15/Bang/2017 & 31 to 37/Bang/2018, CO Nos. 18 to 24/Bang/2018, WTA Nos.16/Bang/2017 & 38 to 44/Bang/2018 And CO Nos.11 to 17/Bang/2018 - - - Dated:- 6-7-2018 - SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Smt. Padmameenakshi, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. For The Respondent : Shri H. Anil Kumar, CA ORDER Per Bench WTA No.15/Bang/2017 is an appeal by the revenue against the order dated 22.03.2017 of the CWT(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru relating to assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 in respect of the assessee, viz., Mr. Vivek B. Chand. WTA No. 16/Bang/2017 is also an appeal by the revenue against the order dated 21.03.2017 of the CWT(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru relating to assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 in respect of the assessee, viz., Mr. Rajesh B. Chand. The Revenue had filed single appeal in respect of each assessees, though 7 different assessment years were the subject matter of the decision of the CWT(Appeals). The Registry raised objection pointing out that 7 separate appeals should be filed and filing of one single appeal f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10 18,05,000 91,82,689 1,09,87,689 15,00,000 94,87,689 94,876 91,826 5 2010-11 19,10,800 99,18,428 1,18,29,228 30,00,000 88,29,228 88,292 88,292 6 2011-12 24,49,900 1,24,16,074 1,48,65,974 30,00,000 1,18,65,974 1,18,659 1,18,659 7 2012-13 30,77,800 1,67,32,981 1,98,10,781 30,00,000 1,68,10,781 1,68,107 1,67,329 Total Tax 6,49,550 Sri Rajesh B Chand Bangalore Statement of Wealth computed by Assessing Officer for A Y 2006-07 to A Y 2012-13 and extra Wealth Tax levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tate duty, etc. As per Instruction No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal was fixed at ₹ 1 lakh. Instruction No.2/2005 dated 24.10.2005 in para 4 clearly lays down as follows:- 4. Subject to the paragraphs 2 and 3 above, the Instruction No. 1979 dated 27.3.2000 as clarified subsequently in Instruction No. 1985 dated 29.6.2000, will continue to govern the decision for filing of departmental appeals. 5. It is thus clear that as far as appeals to be filed by the Revenue under the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 are concerned, the monetary limits for filing appeals before the Tribunal will ₹ 2 lakhs as per Instruction No.2 / 2005 dated 24.10.2005. These appeals by the revenue have been filed after 24.10.2005 and therefore the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal by the Revenue have to be satisfied for maintainability of appeals of the revenue before the Tribunal. From the chart of tax effect filed by the assessees which is extracted in the earlier part of this order, it is clear that the tax effect in all these appeals taken individually is less than ₹ 2 lakhs. 6. The learned DR however pointed out that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not maintainable. 9. Besides the above, the stand of the department is that since the order of CIT(Appeals) is a common order, the cumulative tax effect should be seen. On this aspect, however, we find that in Instruction No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, it has been made clear that even in group cases cumulative tax effect should not be taken into consideration. The relevant para of the Instruction reads as follows:- 2. . The new monetary limits would apply with reference to each case taken singly. In other words, in group cases, each case should individually satisfy the new monetary limits. The working out of monetary limits will therefore not take into consideration the cumulative revenue effect as envisaged in Board's earlier Instruction referred to above. 5. These instruction will apply to litigation under other Direct taxes also e.g. wealth-tax, gift-tax, estate duty etc. 10. Even otherwise, the cumulative tax effect should not be considered. Paragraph-5 of Circular No.3/2012 prescribing monetary limits for filing appeal before appellate forums had a clause which provided that in case of a composite order of any High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... effect is less than the prescribed of the year(s) in which the tax effect exceeds the monetary limit prescribed. In case where a composite order/judgment involves more than one assessee, each assessee shall be dealt with separately. 17. In case of an assessee, where common order is passed in respect of more than one assessment year, which involves common issues even if in one of the assessment years the tax effect is more than ₹ 10 lakhs, irrespective of the fact that in respect of other assessment years which is part of the common order, the tax effect is less than ₹ 10 lakhs, the revenue is entitled to file appeal even in respect such assessment years where the tax effect is less than ₹ 10 lakhs. However, in case where there is no common order and an order is passed only in respect of an assessment, year and the tax effect therein is less than ₹ 10 lakhs, the revenue cannot file the appeal. 18. On thorough scrutiny of para 5 of the Circular No. 3/2011, we find that there appears to be a glaring discrimination offending the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution. In the case of a common order passed in respect of one or more assessment year/y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
