ACIT, New Delhi V. Shri Charu Shekhar Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 1156/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2868 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K JIWANI
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect
• Section: 115JB; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND MS S. KAMBLE, JM ITA NO.1156/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR : 2011-12 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI VS SHRI CHARU SHEKHAR GUPTA 203, ASHADEEP APARTMENT, 9 HALLY ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001 PAN: AAAPG6913C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.1154/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2009-10 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, ROOM NO. 332, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI VS SHRI CHARU SHEKHAR GUPTA 203, ASHADEEP APARTMENT, 9 HALLY ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001 PAN: AAAPG6913C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.5057/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2012-13 DCIT, CIRCLE-6(2) ROOM NO. 390, C.R. BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI VS M/S CONTINENTAL EQUIPMENT (INDIA) PVT. LTD, B-19, DSIDC INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, ROHTAK ROAD, NANGLOI, NEW DELHI PAN: AAACC0847N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.4775/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2015-16 ITO, WARD-1(3), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 13-A SUBHASH ROAD, DEHRADUN VS SMT. DEVESHWARI BAMPAL C/O VERENDRA KALRA & CO., 75/7, RAJPUR ROAD, DEHRADUN PAN: AFTPB3877N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 ITA NO.1697/DEL/2018 ASSTT. YEAR: 2014-15 ITO (E), WARD-1(3), E-2 BLOCK, ROOM NO. 2419, 24 TH FLOOR, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, CIVIC CENTRE, JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU MARG, NEW DELHI VS DELHI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 49, IIND FLOOR, RANI JHANSI ROAD, NEW DELHI PAN: AAATD3885A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.2886/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2011-12 ITO, PATEL MARG, KOTDWAR VS SH. DEEPAK SINGH RAWAT, VILL- BAHELI KYORK, PAURI GARHWAL, UTTARAKHAND PAN: ALRPR4415Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.4161/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2011-12 ITO, WARD 8(2), NEW DELHI VS M/S ENSOLE ENERGY PVT. LTD., E- 43, GALI NO. 2, HARI NAGAR, PART- II, BADARPUR, NEW DELHI-110044 PAN: AABCE8166D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.5008 /DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2013-14 ACIT, CIRCLE, 56(1), NEW DELHI VS CHOUDHARY AJAB SINGH AND CO, 1619, A, NAVEEN SHAHADARA, SHAHDARA, DELHI-110032 PAN: AAAFC6393C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 3 ITA NO.4148 /DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2011-12 ACIT, CIRCLE-61(1), NEW DELHI VS M/S CONSULTANTS SOIL ENGINEERING, B-310, ANSAL CHAMBER, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI PAN: AAAFC3686Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.5848/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2014-15 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, ROOM NO. 105, CGO COMPLEX-II, IST FLOOR, KAMLA NEHRU NAGAR, GHAZIABAD VS M/S DOON EDUCATION & ASSOCIATED SERVICE SOCIETY, 18- TEG BAHADUR ROAD, DEHRADUN PAN: AAAAR3499M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.6135 /DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2009-10 ACIT, CIRCLE-74(1), NEW DELHI VS M/S DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION & LITERACY, CASH SECTION, C-WING, SHASTRI BHAWAN, DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, NEW DELHI TAN:DELE03737G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.6662 /DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2013-14 ACIT, CIRCLE-9(1), NEW DELHI VS M/S FIBCOM INDIA LIMITED, LGF- 84, WORLD TRADE CENTRE, BARAKHAMBA LANE, CANNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI-110001 PAN: AAACF2237P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 4 ITA NO.3175/DEL/2016 ASSTT. YEAR: 2013-14 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, ROOM NO. 363, E-2, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI VS J.B. DECORE PVT. LTD., 48, M.G. MARG, SULTANPUR, NEW DELHI PAN: AABCJ9708N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.3590 /DEL/2016 ASSTT. YEAR: 2009-10 ACIT, CIRCLE-26, ROOM NO. 323, 3 RD FLOOR, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI VS ORIENTAL QUARRIES AND MINES PVT. LTD., 21/48, COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, DIPLOMATIC ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI PAN: AABCO0686Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.5635/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2014-15 DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), NEW DELHI VS M/S ALM INFOTECH CITY PVT. LTD., B-418, NEW FRIENDS COLONY, NEW DELHI PAN: AACCA4886B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.6046/DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR: 2014-15 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 13-A, SUBHASH ROAD, DEHRADUN VS M/S ABL PROJECTS, PANACHE VALLEY, VILLAGE CHALLANG, SAHASTRADHARA ROAD, DEHRADUN PAN: AAKFB6455G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 5 REVENUE BY : SHRI V.K. JIWANI, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 23.08.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.08.2018 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: ALL THESE APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) FOR THE DIFFERENT ASS ESSMENT YEARS. SINCE THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER SO THESE ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES. WE, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEES AND THE APPEALS ARE DECIDED AFTER HEARING LEARNED S R. DR. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN EACH OF THESE APPEAL S IS LESS THAN RS. 20 LAKHS, SO THESE APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11.7.2018 ISSUED BY THE C BDT WHEREIN THE MONITORY LIMIT FOR NON FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT HAS BEEN INCREASED TO RS. 20 LAKHS. 3. THE LD. SR. DR, SUBMITTED THAT CIRCULAR NO.3/201 8 IS NOT A BLANKET BAR ON FILING OF APPEALS BEFORE ITAT AND PA RA 10 DETAILS THE EXCEPTIONS TO FILE THE APPEAL WHERE TAX EFFECT IS L ESS THAN RS.20 LACS AND ALSO CLARIFIES THAT IN CASES WHERE TAX EFFECT I S LESS THAN RS.20 LAKHS AND ALSO CLARIFIES THAT IN CASES WHERE TAX EF FECT CANNOT BE QUANTIFIED AS IN THE CASE OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA, THE MONETARY LIMIT WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE. IT WAS FURTHER SUBM ITTED THAT THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR NO.3/18 HAS BEEN AMENDED VIDE LE TTER F.NO.279/MISC.142/2007-ITJ(PT) DATED 20 TH JULY, 2018 AS UNDER:- 6 (A) WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROVIS IONS OF AN ACT OR RULE IS UNDER CHALLENGE, OR (B) WHERE BOARDS ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTION OR CIRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR ULTRA VIRES, OR (C) WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS B EEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT, OR (D) WHERE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN INCOME/UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN ASSETS INCLUDING FINANCI AL ASSETS/UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN BANK ACCOUNT. (E) WHERE ADDITION IS BASED ON INFORMATION RECEIVE D FROM EXTERNAL SOURCES IN THE NATURE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT A GENCIES SUCH AS CBI/ED/DRI/SFIO/DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE (DGGI). (F) CASES WHERE PROSECUTION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND IS PENDING IN THE COURT. STRICTLY SPEAKING, ALL ISSUES PERTAINING TO SECTION 153A/153C FALL WITHIN THE AMBIT OF 10(A) AS THESE ISSUES HAVE BEEN DECIDED BY THE COURTS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUO US PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND ON MOST ISSUES THE REVENUE IS IN APP EAL AGAINST THE SAID JUDGMENTS. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES. IN OUR OPINION, THE AMENDED CIRCULAR IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE RATHER IT IS COVERED BY THE ORIGIN AL CIRCULAR NO.3/18 DATED 11.07.2018, VIDE WHICH THE CBDT HAS REVISED T HE MONETARY LIMIT TO RS.20,00,000/- FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE SAID CIRCULAR READS AS UNDER: SUBJECT: REVISION OF MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBU NAL, HIGH COURTS AND SLPS/APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT- MEASURES FOR REDUCING LITIGATION-REG. REFERENCE IS INVITED TO BOARDS CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 WHEREIN MONETARY LIMITS AND OTHER CONDIT IONS FOR FILING DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS (IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS) BEFORE 7 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, HIGH COURTS AND SLPS / APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT WERE SPECIFIED. 2. IN SUPERSESSION OF THE ABOVE CIRCULAR, IT HAS BE EN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS MAY BE FILED ON MERITS BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND HIG H COURTS AND SLPS/ APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT KEEPI NG IN VIEW THE MONETARY LIMITS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED B ELOW. 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S NO APPEALS/SLPS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 20,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 50,00,000/- 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 1,00,00,000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETA RY LIMITS PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, TAX EFFECT MEANS THE DIFFERE NCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX TH AT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN RED UCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAIN ST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRE D TO AS DISPUTED ISSUES). FURTHER, TAX EFFECT SHALL BE T AX INCLUDING APPLICABLE SURCHARGE AND CESS. HOWEVER, THE TAX WIL L NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON, EXCEPT WHERE CHARGEAB ILITY OF INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHARGEAB ILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASES WHERE RETURNED LO SS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME, THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. IN CASE OF PENA LTY ORDERS, THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EF FECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF, IN THE CASE OF 8 AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL CAN BE FILED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT SPEC IFIED IN PARA 3. NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN A SSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN OTHER WORDS, HENCEFOR TH, APPEALS CAN BE FILED ONLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE TAX EFFECT IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER, IN CASE OF A COM POSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHI CH INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON I SSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEALS SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF ALL SUCH ASSESSMENT YEARS EVEN IF THE TA X EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMITS IN ANY OF THE YEAR(S), IF IT IS DECIDED TO FILE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE Y EAR(S) IN WHICH TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRI BED. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSITE ORDER/JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MOR E THAN ONE ASSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEP ARATELY. 6. FURTHER, WHERE INCOME IS COMPUTED UNDER THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 115JC, FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETERMINATION OF TAX EFFECT, TAX ON THE TOTAL INC OME ASSESSED SHALL BE COMPUTED AS PER THE FOLLOWING FORMULA- (A B) + (C D) WHERE, A = THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OTHER THAN THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 115JB OR S ECTION 115JC (HEREIN CALLED GENERAL PROVISIONS); B = THE TOTAL INCOME THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABL E HAD THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE GENERAL PROVIS IONS BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES U NDER GENERAL PROVISIONS; C = THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 115JC; D = THE TOTAL INCOME THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABL E HAD THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE PROVISIONS CON TAINED IN SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 1I5JCWAS REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF DISPUTED ISSUES UNDER THE SAID PROVISIONS : 9 HOWEVER, WHERE THE AMOUNT OF DISPUTED ISSUES IS CON SIDERED BOTH UNDER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 115J B OR SECTION 115JC AND UNDER GENERAL PROVISIONS, SUCH AM OUNT SHALL NOT BE REDUCED FROM TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED WHI LE DETERMINING THE AMOUNT UNDER ITEM D. 7. IN A CASE WHERE APPEAL BEFORE A TRIBUNAL OR A C OURT IS NOT FILED ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF THE TAX EFFECT BEING LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED ABOVE, THE PR. COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME-TAX/ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SHALL SPECIF ICALLY RECORD THAT EVEN THOUGH THE DECISION IS NOT ACCEPT ABLE, APPEAL IS NOT BEING FILED ONLY ON THE CONSIDERATION THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIE D IN THIS CIRCULAR. FURTHER, IN SUCH CASES, THERE WILL BE NO PRESUMPTION THAT THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT HAS ACQU IESCED IN THE DECISION ON THE DISPUTED ISSUES. THE INCOME- TAX DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT BE PRECLUDED FROM FILING AN AP PEAL AGAINST THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, OR IN THE CASE OF AN Y OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, IF THE TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE SPECIFIED MONETARY LIMITS. 8. IN THE PAST, A NUMBER OF INSTANCES HAVE COME TO THE NOTICE OF THE BOARD, WHEREBY AN ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED RELIE F FROM THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT THE D EPARTMENT HAS IMPLICITLY ACCEPTED THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNA L OR COURT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMEN T YEAR OR IN THE CASE OF ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR A NY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, BY NOT FILING AN APPEAL ON THE SAM E DISPUTED ISSUES. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES/COUNSELS M UST MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT THAT THE APPEAL IN SUCH CASES WAS NOT FILED O R NOT ADMITTED ONLY FOR THE REASON OF THE TAX EFFECT BEIN G LESS THAN THE SPECIFIED MONETARY LIMIT AND, THEREFORE, NO INF ERENCE SHOULD BE DRAWN THAT THE DECISIONS RENDERED THEREIN WERE ACCEPTABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT. ACCORDINGLY, THEY SHO ULD IMPRESS UPON THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT THAT SUCH CA SES DO NOT HAVE ANY PRECEDENT VALUE AND ALSO BRING TO THE NOTI CE OF THE TRIBUNAL/ COURT THE PROVISIONS OF SUB SECTION (4) O F SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 WHICH READ AS UNDE R : (4) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR COURT, HEARING SUCH APPEAL OR REFERENCE, SHALL HAVE REGARD TO THE ORDERS, INST RUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) AND THE 10 CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH SUCH APPEAL OR APPLICATIO N FOR REFERENCE WAS FILED OR NOT FILED IN RESPECT OF ANY CASE. 9. AS THE EVIDENCE OF NOT FILING APPEAL DUE TO THI S CIRCULAR MAY HAVE TO BE PRODUCED IN COURTS, THE JUDICIAL FOL DERS IN THE OFFICE OF PR. CSIT/CSIT MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A SYS TEMIC MANNER FOR EASY RETRIEVAL. 10. ADVERSE JUDGMENTS RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING ISS UES SHOULD BE CONTESTED ON MERITS NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE TAX EFFECT ENTAILED IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE OR THERE IS NO TAX EFFECT: (A) WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROVIS IONS OF AN ACT OR RULE IS UNDER CHALLENGE, OR (B) WHERE BOARDS ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTION OR CIRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR ULTRA FIRES , OR (C) WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS B EEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT, OR (D) WHERE THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREI GN ASSETS/ BANK ACCOUNTS. 11. THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE S HALL NOT APPLY TO WRIT MATTERS AND DIRECT TAX MATTERS OTHER THAN INCOME TAX. FILING OF APPEALS IN OTHER DIRECT TAX M ATTERS SHALL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNED BY RELEVANT PROVISION S OF STATUTE AND RULES. FURTHER, IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE OR NOT INVOLVED, SUCH AS THE CASE OF R EGISTRATION OF TRUSTS OR INSTITUTIONS UNDER SECTION 12A/ 12AA O F THE IT ACT, 1961 ETC., FILING OF APPEAL SHALL NOT BE GOVER NED BY THE LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE AND DECISION TO FI LE APPEALS IN SUCH CASES MAY BE TAKEN ON MERITS OF A PARTICULA R CASE. 12. IT IS CLARIFIED THAT THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS. 20 LAKHS FOR FILING APPEALS BEFORE THE ITAT WOULD APPLY EQUALLY TO CROSS OBJECTIONS UNDER SECTION 253(4) OF THE ACT. CROSS O BJECTIONS BELOW THIS MONETARY LIMIT, ALREADY FILED, SHOULD BE PURSUED FOR DISMISSAL AS WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. FILING OF CROSS OBJECTIONS BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT MAY NOT BE CONS IDERED HENCEFORTH. SIMILARLY, REFERENCES TO HIGH COURTS AN D SLPS/ APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT BELOW THE MONETARY LIM IT OF 11 RS. 50 LAKHS AND RS. 1 CRORE RESPECTIVELY SHOULD BE PURSUED FOR DISMISSAL AS WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. REFERENCES BEFORE HIGH COURT AND SLPS/ APPEALS BELOW THESE LIMITS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED HENCEFORTH. 13. THIS CIRCULAR WILL APPLY TO SLPS/ APPEALS/ CRO SS OBJECTIONS/ REFERENCES TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN SC/HCS/TRIBUNAL AND IT SHALL ALSO APPLY RETROSPECTI VELY TO PENDING SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROSS OBJECTIONS/REFERENCES. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARE 3 AB OVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. 14. THE ABOVE MAY BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF ALL C ONCERNED. 15. THIS ISSUES UNDER SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME-TA X ACT 1961. 5. FROM CLAUSE 12 & 13 OF THE ABOVE SAID CIRCULAR I T IS CLEAR THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING AP PEALS ALSO AND AS PER CLAUSE 13, THERE IS CLEAR CUT INSTRUCTION TO TH E DEPARTMENT TO WITHDRAW OR NOT TO PRESS THE APPEALS FILED BEFORE T HE ITAT WHEREIN TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS.20,00,000/-. THESE INSTR UCTIONS ARE OPERATIVE RETROSPECTIVELY TO THE PENDING APPEALS. 6. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 DATED 11.07.2018, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHO ULD NOT HAVE FILED THESE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 23/08/2018) SD/- SD/- (S. KAMBLE) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED:29/08/2018 SH 12 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(APPEALS) 5.DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 23.08.2018 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 28.08.2018 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. 11. DATE OF UPLOADING 30.08.2018