9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 844X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prescribing monetary limits for filing the appeals by the Department before the Tribunal/Hon ble High Court/Hon ble Supreme Court are also applicable on the pending appeals on the date of circular. Accordingly in view of the judgment of Hon ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT V/s Madhukar K Inamdar HUF [ 2009 (7) TMI 145 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] the CBDT Circular No.5/2024 is applicable in the present appeals filed on 27.2.2024 and consequently due to low tax effect the appeals of the revenue are not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. Since the appeals of the department are dismissed due to low tax effect therefore, we do not proposed to go into the merits of the issue of allowability of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Appeals of the revenue are dismissed. - Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Judicial Member And Shri B.M. Biyani, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Milind Wadhwani, CA For the Revenue : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. These two appeals by the revenue are directed against the two separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centers,(NFAC), Delhi both dated 30.12.2023 for the Assessment Years 2014-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as it was there in the earlier circulars. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the appeals of the department are not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. He has also relied upon Circular No.18/2015 dated 02.11.2015 whereby the CBDT has clarified that in view of the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CIT V/s Nawanshahar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd 160 Taxman 48 (SC) the income arising from the investments made by the cooperative banks as well as commercial banks is attributable to the business of banking falling under the head Profits and Gains of Business and Profession and therefore, is eligible for claiming deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The Board has decided that no appeal may be filed on this ground by the officers of the Department and the appeals already filed, if any, on this ground before the Courts/Tribunal may be withdrawn/nor pressed upon. Thus, the Ld. AR has submitted that even otherwise when the CIT(A) has allowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) in respect of interest income which is in conformity with the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court as well as CBDT circular No.18/2015 (supra) the department ought to have not filed these appeals and now ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Where strictures/adverse comments have been passed and/or cost has been levied against the Department of Revenue, CBDT or their officers, or f. Where the tax effect is not quantifiable or not involved, such as the case of registration of trusts or institutions under sections 10(23C), 12A/ 12AA/12AB of the Act, order passed u/s 263 of the Act etc. The reference to cases involving sections referred here, where it is not possible to quantify tax effect or tax effect is not involved, is for the purpose of illustration only. g. Where addition relates to undisclosed foreign income/undisclosed foreign assets (including financial assets)/undisclosed foreign bank account, or h. Cases involving organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries, or i. Where mandated by a Court s directions, or j. Writ matters, or k. Matters related to wealth tax, fringe benefit tax, equalization levy and any matter other than the Income Tax Act, or l. In respect of litigation arising out of disputes related to TDS/TCS matters in both domestic and International taxation charges:- i. Where dispute relates to the determination of the natu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5-2008 would be very much applicable to the pending cases requiring department to withdraw cases wherein the tax effect is less than the prescribed monetary limits. 12. At this juncture, it will also be relevant to mention that it was necessary for the CBDT to put a caveat, while issuing instructions vide its Circular dated 5-6-2007, that the Appeals involving substantial question of law of recurring nature should not be withdrawn since provision like section 268A of the Income-tax Act was absent. Now, in view of insertion of the provision of section 268A by the Finance Act, 2008 with effect from 1- 4-1999 in the Income-tax Act, 1961, no prejudice could be caused to the revenue even if the cases involving legal issues of recurring nature are withdrawn, since the newly inserted provision takes care of the adverse eventuality which could have been put against the revenue. The section 268A of the Act, reads as under : 268A. Filing of appeal or application for reference by income-tax authority. (1) The Board may, from time to time, issue orders, instructions or directions to other income-tax authorities, fixing such monetary limits as it may deem fit, for the purpose of regulating fili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
