Full Text
Translation output
$-42,43,44,46,47,49&50
% 03.01.2017
Present: Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Standing Counsel for Appellants in
Item Nos.Nos.42,43,44,46,47,49& 50, Ms.Roopali Gupta for Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate for
Respondents in Item Nos.42,43,44,46,47,49& 50.
+ITA Nos.405.411.414.523.527.717 8c 726 of2015
(common order)'
This Court had framed a question of law for consideration in these appeals. Given its pendency vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, the Central Board of Direct Taxes(CBDT) spelt out the monetary limits beyond which appeals could be preferred before the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal (ITAT), High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court respectively. Clause 10 ofthe Circular reads as below:-
"10. This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to befiled henceforth in High
Courts/Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.
Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such
, appeal wasfiled."
These appeals concern seven assessment years reflecting a block period. The ITAT had passed a composite order in all these matters.
Furthermore, the ITAT had allowed the assessees's appeal. This Court notices that the tax effect in these appeals is below the prescribed limited of
?20,00,000/-; furtheimore, superficially, none of the case falls within the exception. In any event, it is clarified, iffor some reason,these appeals or any ofthem falls within the exception spelt out in the Circular, it is open to
2017:DHC:9032-DB the Revenue to seek restoration ofthe concerned appeals by an appropriate application. The appeals are dismissed butin the above terms.
S.RAVINDRA BHAT,J.
NAJMIWAZIRI,J.
JANUARY 03,2017 sb
2017:DHC:9032-DB
% 03.01.2017
Present: Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Standing Counsel for Appellants in
Item Nos.Nos.42,43,44,46,47,49& 50, Ms.Roopali Gupta for Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate for
Respondents in Item Nos.42,43,44,46,47,49& 50.
+ITA Nos.405.411.414.523.527.717 8c 726 of2015
(common order)'
This Court had framed a question of law for consideration in these appeals. Given its pendency vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, the Central Board of Direct Taxes(CBDT) spelt out the monetary limits beyond which appeals could be preferred before the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal (ITAT), High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court respectively. Clause 10 ofthe Circular reads as below:-
"10. This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to befiled henceforth in High
Courts/Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.
Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such
, appeal wasfiled."
These appeals concern seven assessment years reflecting a block period. The ITAT had passed a composite order in all these matters.
Furthermore, the ITAT had allowed the assessees's appeal. This Court notices that the tax effect in these appeals is below the prescribed limited of
?20,00,000/-; furtheimore, superficially, none of the case falls within the exception. In any event, it is clarified, iffor some reason,these appeals or any ofthem falls within the exception spelt out in the Circular, it is open to
2017:DHC:9032-DB the Revenue to seek restoration ofthe concerned appeals by an appropriate application. The appeals are dismissed butin the above terms.
S.RAVINDRA BHAT,J.
NAJMIWAZIRI,J.
JANUARY 03,2017 sb
2017:DHC:9032-DB
JUDGMENT