9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77/2018, ITXA/2978/2018, ITXA/2979/2018, ITXA/3067/2018, ITXA/3069/2018, ITXA/3070/2018, ITXA/3088/2018, ITXA/647/2019, ITXA/653/2019, ITXA/704/2019, ITXA/708/2019, ITXA/709/2019, ITXA/763/2019, ITXA/1216/2019, ITXA/1219/2019, ITXA/1474/2019, ITXA/179/2022 AND ITXA/ 240/2022. For the Appellants: 1. Mr. P.C. Chhotaray, Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms. Mohinee Chougule, Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma, Ms.Mamta Omle, Ms. Sushama Nagaraj, Mr. Vipul A. Bajpayee, Ms. Swapna Gokhale, Mr. Subir Kumar, Ms. Shilpa Goel, S.V. Bharucha, Mr. Devvrat Singh, Mr. P.A. Narayanan, Mr. Vikas Khanchandani, Mr. N.C. Mohanty, Mr. A.K. Saxena, Ms. Samiksha Kanani, Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Mr. Dinesh Gulabani, Mr. Ashok Kotangale, Ms. Samita Thakur., 2. Mr. Sameer Dalal., 3. Mr. Sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 28. Mr. Subir Kumar a/w. Mr. Abhinav Palsikar, 29. Mr. Rahul Hakani a/w. Ms. Neelam C. Jadhav, Mr. Shashi Bekal, 30. Mr. Akshay A. Pawar i/b. Mr. Govind Javeri, 31. Ms. Aarti Vissanji, 32. Mr. Ranit Basu a/w. Ms. Maitri Malde, Mr. Dua Shaikh, 33. Mr. Sanket Bora a/w. Ms. Vidhi Punamiya, Ms. Amiya Das, Ms. Unnatii Thakkar i/b. SPCM Legal, 34. Mr. Kalpesh Turalkar, 35. Ms. Vasanti Patel, 36. Mr. Chetan A. Alai, 37. Mr.. B. V. Jhaveri, 38. Mr. Yohaan Shah i/b. Negandhi Shah & Himayatullah, 39. Mr. Sinran Dhawan a/w. Ms. Vidushi Maheshwari, Mr. Prathamesh Chavan i/b. India Law, 40. Ms. Neha Anchlia, a/w. Mr. M Jain, Mr. S. Mishra, 41. Mr. Shreyash Shah a/w. Mr. Mukesh Butani, 42. Mr. Bharat Raichandani a/w. Bhagrati Sahu i/b. UBR Legal, 43. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rch 2024. He therefore submitted that though the monetary limits in these Appeals were less than Rs. 2 crores, the revenue was not obliged to withdraw them or refrain from pursuing these appeals. 4. Mr. Pardiwalla, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents, submitted that the CBDT circulars comprise two parts. The first part, which relates to the withdrawal or non-pursuit of Appeals where the tax effect is less than Rs. 2 crores, was specifically made applicable to pending matters. However, the second part, which addresses the exceptions, was explicitly given only a prospective effect. Therefore, he submitted that the revenue, relying on the exceptions delineated by the two circulars, could not insist on pursuing the pending Appeals. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 024 provides that the monetary limits in paragraph 4 concerning filing Appeals/SLPs shall apply to all cases including those relating to TDS/TCS under the Act with the following exceptions where the decision to file Appeals/ SLPs shall be taken on merits, without regard to the tax effect and the monetary limits. One of the exceptions in clause (h) concerns cases involving organized tax evasion, including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries. 10. Circular No. 09/2024, dated 17 September 2024, increased the monetary limits. Paragraph 5 of this circular dated 17 September 2024 provided the modifications shall come into effect from the date of issue of this circular. Further, it was stated in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13. Paragraph 30 of V. M. Salgaonkar and Brothers (supra) is pertinent and is transcribed below for ease of reference: "30. In our opinion, the exceptions in terms of which the revenue seeks to prosecute the present appeals would have no application for two reasons. First of all, the exception which the revenue seeks to rely upon was created for the first time in the Circular dated 15.03.2024 and para 10 of the said Circular makes it abundantly clear that the Circulars would apply to appeals that would be filed henceforth which also stands to reason as a Circular which carves out additional exceptions can only have prospective effect because it is only on the issuance of such a circular that the various exceptions detailed in para 3.1 w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17.09.2024 have to be read in a holistic manner and both must be given retrospective effect is contrary to the plain terms of the said Circulars." 14. The coordinate bench relied on the decision in Satish Kumar Agarwal (supra), in which the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court also took the same view. 15. Thus, based on the above two CBDT circulars and the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in V. M. Salgaonkar and Brothers (supra), we dispose of these Appeals since Mr. Chhotaray maintains that he has no instructions to withdraw the same. This was the course of action adopted by the Coordinate Bench in V. M. Salgaonkar and Brothers (supra) and by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Satish Kumar Agarwal (supra). 16. All these appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
