TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 221
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the addition made by the Assessing Officer/ without appreciating the fact Nashik Municipal corporation had granted conditional permission for development in respect of Land at Adgaon at Survey No.556,558/560 & 567 and therefore, the said land comes under the jurisdiction of the Nashik Municipal Corporation, and hence, it is an 'Urban land'. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CWT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the land at Kamatwade, bearing Survey No.989/2 is free for development whereas exemption from Wealth Tax is available only to such land, on which construction of a building is not permissible by any law. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The limited issue which arises in the present appeal is the maintainability of appeal filed by the Revenue on account of tax effect. The case of assessee is that where the CIT(A) has passed separate orders and since the tax effect on account of wealth tax demanded excluding the interest charged under section 17B of the Act is less than Rs. 2 lakhs, then the said appeal is not maintainable, in view of CBDT Instructions issued from date to date. The assessee has filed on record the Annexure to the wealth tax assessment order passed, wherein wealth tax due on the assessed wealth has been computed as under:- "Assessed Wealth Rs.1,79,94,680 Wealth Tax Rs. 1,64,947 Add Interest u/s 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0 which has been further approved vide CBDT Instruction No.05/2008, dated 15.05.2008. 6. Similar issue arose before the Chennai Bench of Tribunal in the ACIT Vs. Dr. M.P. Naresh Kumar (supra) and the appeals filed by the Revenue having low tax effect were dismissed holding as under:- "4. We have perused the orders and also heard the contention of learned D.R. As per learned D.R., though the penalty amount involved was only a paltry sum of Rs. 13,874/-, the appeal was still maintainable for a reason that Instruction No.3/2011 dated 9.2.2011 prescribing monetary limits for filing appeals, applied only to income-tax matters. On going through Instruction No.3/2011, it is seen that at para 10 it is mentioned that monetary limits specified ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id Instruction itself which reads as under:- "Reference is invited to Board's instructions No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, No.1985 dated 29.6.2000, No.6 of 2003 dated 17.7.2003, No.19 of 2003 dated 23.12.2003, No.5/2004 dated 27.5.2004, No.2/2005 dated 24.10.2005 and No.5/2007 dated 16.7.2007, wherein monetary limits for filing departmental appeals (in Income-tax matters) and other conditions were specified, for filing appeals before Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court." 6. Of the many instructions that were superseded, what are relevant here are Instruction No.5/2007 dated 16.7.2007 and Instruction No.1979 dated 27.3.2000. Para 5 of Instruction No.1979 dated 27.3.2000 clearly mentions that the said instruction applied to other....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....akh. By virtue of Instruction No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, the monetary limits mentioned applied also to wealth-tax, gift-tax and Estate Duty matters. In our opinion, when these instructions are read together, despite the supersession effected by Instruction No.3/2011 dated 9.2.2011 of earlier Instruction No.5/2008 dated 15.5.2008 and supersession of instructions mentioned at para 5 above by us, through Instruction No.5/2008 dated 15.5.2008, the earlier instructions insofar as it applied to wealth-tax, gifttax and Estate Duty matter would continue in force. For taking the view that the Instruction No.5/2008 as also Instruction No.3/2011 will apply to wealth-tax matter also, we are fortified by the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the ca....