2014 (12) TMI 427 - AT - Income Tax

Appeal dismissed for not meeting monetary limits set by CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014.

Income-tax Officer, Ward-34(3), Kolkata. Versus Hemant Marda

The tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal as it did not meet the prescribed monetary limits for filing appeals before the ITAT, in accordance with CBDT ... Maintainability of appeal – Tax effect less than prescribed monetary limit for filing appeal –Tax effect less than ₹ 4 lacs – Revision of monetary limits through circular - Held that:- Following the decision in CIT Vs M/s. P. S. Jain & Co. [2010 (8) TMI 702 - Delhi High Court] - the Board has rightly taken a decision not to file references if the tax effect less than the amount prescribed - The same policy for old matters needs to be adopted by the Department - Instruction No.5/2014 FNo279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) dated 10th July, 2014 will apply to pending appeals also for the reason that the same is exactly identical to earlier instructions - also in The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Smt. Vijaya V. Kavekar [2013 (2) TMI 451 - Bombay High Court] it has been held that the applicability of circular was considered and the monetary limit was increased and appeals were to be filed only in cases where the tax effect exceeded ₹ 4 Lacs - no appeals would be filed in the cases involving tax effect less than ₹ 4 Lacs notwithstanding the issue being of recurring nature - the prevailing instructions fixing the monetary limit for the tax effect would hold good even for pending cases – revenue could not point out any of the exceptions - this being a low tax effect case, the appeal cannot be admitted – Decided against revenue. Issues Involved:1. Tax effect below the prescribed monetary limits for filing appeals before ITAT.2. Applicability of CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 to pending appeals.3. Exceptions to the applicability of the monetary limits.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Tax effect below the prescribed monetary limits for filing appeals before ITAT:The primary issue in this appeal is whether the revenue's appeal is maintainable given that the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limits for filing appeals before the ITAT. The tax effect in this case is Rs. 2,76,896/-, which is below the Rs. 4 lakhs threshold set by CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014. The counsel for the assessee argued that based on this instruction, the appeal should be dismissed as it does not meet the monetary threshold.2. Applicability of CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 to pending appeals:The revenue argued that the instruction is prospective and applies only to appeals filed on or after 10.07.2014. The tribunal referred to precedents from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, which have held that similar instructions apply to pending cases as well. The courts have emphasized the need to reduce pending litigation where the tax effect is minimal, suggesting that the instruction should apply retrospectively to pending appeals.3. Exceptions to the applicability of the monetary limits:The tribunal examined whether any exceptions to the monetary limits applied in this case. The exceptions include:- Cases involving a loss with a tax effect exceeding the prescribed limit.- Composite orders for multiple assessment years where the cumulative tax effect exceeds the limit.- Cases challenging the constitutional validity of provisions of the Act or IT Rules.- Cases where a Board's order, Notification, Instruction, or Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires.- Cases where a Revenue Audit Objection has been accepted by the Department.The tribunal found that none of these exceptions were applicable in this case. The revenue's representative could not point out any specific exception that would justify maintaining the appeal despite the low tax effect.Conclusion:The tribunal concluded that the appeal of the revenue is not maintainable due to the low tax effect, in line with CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014. The appeal was dismissed in limine without delving into the merits of the case. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to the prescribed monetary limits to reduce unnecessary litigation.Order Pronouncement:The order was pronounced in open court on 09.12.2014, dismissing the appeal of the revenue.