TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (8) TMI 755
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ability of all these appeals in view of the notifications issued by the CBDT prescribing the monetary limits for filing the appeal by the Department before Tribunal by issuing Instruction No. 5 of 2008, dt. 15th May, 2008. 3. Learned Departmental Representative has contended that all these appeals are involving question of law having repetitive recurrence. Therefore, the Department's appeal is very much maintainable before the Tribunal. In support of this the learned Departmental Representative also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajasthan Patrika Ltd. (2002) 178 CTR (Raj) 414 : (2002) 258 ITR 300 (Raj). In the said decision Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has held that the instructions given by the CBDT are all issued for the purpose of convenience of officers of Department and hence the Tribunal is not bound to follow the same. Therefore, this Departmental appeal having been filed properly otherwise is very much maintainable and accordingly sought disposal of the appeal on merits. 4. We have perused the provisions of s. 268A of the IT Act as well as various instructions issued by CBDT on the aspect of fixing monetary limits for fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come-tax matters Monetary limit No. (in Rs.) 1. Appeal before Appellate Tribunal 2,00,000 2. Appeal under s. 260A before High Court 4,00,000 3. Appeal before Supreme Court 10,00,000 4. For this purpose, 'tax effect' means the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had such income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of the issue against which appeal is intended to be filed (hereafter referred to as 'disputed issues'). However, the tax will not include any interest thereon. Similarly, in loss cases notional tax effect should be taken into account. In the cases of penalty orders, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....partmental Representative/counsel must make every effort to bring to the notice of the Tribunal or the Court that the appeal in such cases was not filed or not admitted only by reason of the tax effect being less than the specified monetary limit and therefore, no inference should be drawn that the decisions rendered therein were acceptable to the Department. Accordingly, they should impress upon the Tribunal or the Court that such cases do not have any precedent value. 8. Adverse judgments relating to the following should be contested irrespective of the tax effect. (a) Where the constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or rule are under challenge. (b) Where Board's order, notification, instruction or circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires. (c) Where Revenue audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department. 9. The proposal for filing SLP under Art. 136 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court should, in all cases, be sent to the Directorate of IT (Legal and Research), New Delhi and the decision to file SLP shall be in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice. 10. The monetary limits specified in para 3 above wil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no appeal is filed (taking into consideration the tax effect, the learned CIT(A) concerned shall specify on record that appeal is not filed because tax effect is below the monetary limits prescribed above though the decision is not acceptable. In such cases, the Department is not precluded from filing appeal for similar such decision if the tax effect exceeds the specified limit for another assessment year. In para 8, it specifies that adverse orders relating to constitutional validity of provision of Act thereof, or where Board's notification, instruction or circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires or where Revenue audit objection has been accepted by the Department. In para 10, it specifies that these monetary limits will not apply to writ matters. In para 12, it specifies that the instructions are issued under s. 268A, sub-s. (1) of the IT Act. 6. On analysing the issue raised in this appeal in the light of provisions contained in s. 268A inserted in the IT Act by the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1999, it is found that sub-s. (5) of the said provision is as follows: "(5) Every order, instruction or direction which has been issued b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t involved is below Rs. 2 lacs. At the same time, the instruction has provided that if there is any question of law having recurring nature is involved the rule of monetary limits will not come in the way of filing appeals by the Department and they also state that the tax effect is to be taken as the effect of payment of tax excluding an interest. 8. Analysing the issue raised in the appeal of Department, the tax effect is below Rs. 2 lacs. In terms of instructions stated issued by the CBDT, the contention of the learned Departmental Representative that the instructions issued by CBDT are only for the guidance of the tax authorities as was held by the Hon'ble jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajasthan Patrika cannot help the Departmental contention as with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1999 the provision contained in s. 268A was inserted by the Finance Act, 2008 which clearly states that the instructions or directions issued by the CBDT are to be regarded by the Tribunal while hearing such appeals filed by Department. By this provision the legislature has given a statutory effect to the instructions and directions issued by CBDT and they should be consi....