2020 (3) TMI 1297

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....019 CBDT has issued a circular bearing No.17 of 2019 whereby the department was prohibited from filing appeals before the Tribunal where tax effect by virtue of relief granted by the CIT(A) is less than Rs. 50 lakhs. This circular also contained certain exceptions. On the strength of this circular, the Tribunal has disposed of 628 appeals of the Revenue vide order dated 14.8.2019. The Tribunal has dismissed all these appeals on the ground that tax effect involved in these appeals is less than Rs. 50 lakhs. Out of this bunch of 628 appeals, the Revenue has filed applications pointing out apparent error. The present three applications are also from that very bunch. In these applications, the Revenue has pleaded that the assessment was reopene....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erit. Simply the appeal would not be filed because the case falls within the exceptional clause of the CBDT Instruction for not filing the appeal where the tax effect by virtue of relief granted by the CIT(A) is less than the monetary limit for filing such appeals. In other words, the Department has to assess the merits of the dispute involved and it will not file further appeal against the order of the CIT(A) or ITAT in a mechanical manner. The relevant para-3 of Circular No.17 reads as under:- "3. However, it has been noticed that para 8(c) of Circular No.21/2015, regarding cases where addition made on account of Revenue Audit Objection is deleted, is being erroneously interpreted and appeals are being mechanically filed by the D....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The Circulars continue to bind the Revenue and if they contain any conditions, whether such conditions are attracted or not would have to be proved and established by the Revenue. Once there is no such record before us, we do not countenance the oral request of Mr. Pinto. Consequently, we do not see any reason to entertain this appeal. It is dismissed." 6. The Ld. DR was unable to controvert the above position. 7. On due consideration of all these facts and Circular of the Board, i.e. Circular No. 5 of 2017 in the light of Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision, we are of the view that Department has not brought any substantial material on the record pointing out that appeal was filed after evaluation of merit on the issues ....