TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (6) TMI 167
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., on the date fixed for, i.e. 14.05.2015 neither anybody on behalf of the assessee is present nor there is any application for adjournment. It appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. 3. The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum - "vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subveniunt". 4. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT -vs.- Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and the judgment of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar -vs.- C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. ITA No. 105/Kol/2012 6. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -XII, Kolkata dated 24.10.2011 for the assessment year 2004-05 by taking the following ground of appeal:- "Ld. CIT(A)-XII, Kolkata has erred in law as well as on fact in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,82,263/- on account of capital int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3/2011 and held that the same would apply to pending cases as well even though there was a specific condition in that instruction also that the same would apply to appeals file on or after February, 2011. Hon'ble High Court has considered this issue as under:- 6. The question about applicability of Instruction No.3 of 2011 had been considered and decided by the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court in Tax Appeal No. 78 of 2007, The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Smt. Vijaya V. Kavekar decided on 29.7.2011. The Division Bench, after considering earlier Instructions and various decisions of the Courts on Instructions, relying on the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Madhukar K. Inamdar (HUF) reported in (2010) 229 CTR (Bom) 77, has held in paragraphs 9, 10, 11, 14 and 17 as under: "9. As stated earlier, the Income Tax Act was amended and Section 268A has been introduced on the Statute book with retrospective effect. Section 268A carves out an exception for filing of appeals and References under Section 260 A of the Act. The legislature has prescribed that the CBDT is empowered to issue circulars and instructions from time to time, with regard to filing of appeals depen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....face of the above clear instructions of the CBDT, can contend that the circular dt. 15th May, 2008 issued by the CBDT is applicable to the cases filed after 15th May, 2008 and in compliance thereof, they do not file appeals, if the tax effect is less than Rs. 4 Lakhs; but the said circular is not applicable to the cases filed prior to 15th May, 2008 i.e. to the old pending appeals, even if the tax effect is less than Rs. 4 Lakhs. In our view, there is no logic behind this belief entertained by the Revenue." The Court has further held that the prevailing instructions fixing the monetary limit for the tax effect would hold good even for pending cases. Accordingly, the Court dismissed all the appeals having a tax effect of less than Rs. 4 Lacs. 10. The new CBDT instructions have been issued on 9th February, 2011, being Instruction no. 3 of 2011. The monetary limit has been raised again and clause 3 of the instructions provides that appeals shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits prescribed, henceforth. The monetary limits prescribed for filing an appeal under Section 260A before the High Court has been raised to Rs. 10 Lacs. This instruct....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(ii) As the tax effect in the instant case is less than Rs. 10 lakhs, the appeal stands dismissed on the ground of monetary limit, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim, making it clear that the Department is at liberty to proceed against the assessee in future, if there any amount due from the assessee, on similar issue and if it is above the monetary limit prescribed." 9. We find from the above case law of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sureshchandra Durgaprasad Khatod (HUF), (supra) that in the similar situation and exactly identical instructions were applied to the appeals filed retrospectively. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has discussed that almost all High Courts are of the unanimous view, considering the main objective of such instructions that to reduce the pending litigation, where the tax effect is considerable low or small, the appeal is not maintainable. The recent instruction revising the monetary limit to Rs. 4 lakh for filing appeal before ITAT on income tax matters, as issued vide 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....years in which the tax effect is less than the monetary limit specified in para 3. In other words, henceforth, appeals can be filed only with reference to the tax effect in the relevant assessment year. However, in case of a composite order of any High Court or appellate authority, which involves more than one assessment year and common issues in more than one assessment year, appeal shall be filed in respect of all such assessment years even if the 'tax effect' is less than the prescribed monetary limits in any of the year(s), if it is decided to filed appeal in respect of the year(s) in which 'tax effect' exceeds the monetary limit prescribed. In case where a composite order / judgment involves more than one assessee, each assessee shall be dealt with separately. 6. In a case where appeal before a Tribunal or a Court is not filed only on account of the tax effect being less than the monetary limit specified above, the Commissioner of Income-tax shall specifically record that "even though the decision is not acceptable, appeal is not being filed only on the consideration that the tax effect is less than the monetary limit specified in this instruction". Further, in such cases, th....