Tribunal dismisses Revenue's appeals and Assessee's Cross Objection for breaching tax effect limit.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals and the Assessee's Cross Objection for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2004-05. The Tribunal found that the Revenue's appeals had a tax effect below the prescribed limit of Rs. 10,00,000 as per CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015, which directs withdrawal of appeals in such cases. As the Cross Objection was not pressed by the Assessee during proceedings, it was also dismissed. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to monetary limits for filing appeals and the consequences of non-compliance in tax matters.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Appeals by Revenue and Cross Objection by Assessee regarding orders passed by CIT(A) for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2004-05.

Analysis:

1. Issue of Monetary Limit for Filing Appeals:
During the hearing, the Assessee's representative referred to Circular No. 21 of 2015 issued by CBDT with retrospective effect, revising the monetary limit to Rs. 10,00,000 for not filing appeals before the Tribunal. The tax effect in the Revenue's appeals was below this limit. The Department's representative did not dispute this fact. The Circular applies to pending appeals as well, directing the Department to withdraw appeals where the tax effect is less than Rs. 10,00,000. The Tribunal concluded that the Revenue should not have filed these appeals or should have withdrawn them due to the tax effect being below the prescribed limit. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals without delving into their merits.

2. Cross Objection Dismissal:
The Cross Objection filed by the Assessee was not pressed by their representative during the proceedings. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the Cross Objection.

3. Final Decision:
In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the Assessee. The order was pronounced in an open court on 28.01.2016.

This judgment highlights the importance of adhering to monetary limits for filing appeals before the Tribunal as prescribed by CBDT Circulars. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the Revenue to comply with such limits and not pursue appeals where the tax effect falls below the specified threshold. The dismissal of the appeals and Cross Objection underscores the significance of procedural compliance in tax matters and the consequences of failing to meet the prescribed criteria for pursuing legal remedies.

---