AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts

    Asstt. Cit Range V, Lucknow v. Shri. Krishna Goel Prop. Bharat Vyapar, Bharat Vyapar Bhawan, G.B Mar Lucknow .

    Sunil Kumar Yadav:— This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A).

    2. During the course of hearing, it was noticed that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than the prescribed monetary limit, therefore, the Department ought not to have filed this appeal in view of the instructions issued by C.B.D.T

    2. The Learned D.R did not controvert the above fact.

    3. It is noticed that Section 268A of the Act has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1999 The provisions contained in section 268A read as under:—

    “268A. (1) The Board may, from time to time, issue orders, instructions or directions to other income-tax authorities, fixing such monetary limits as it may deem fit, for the purpose of regulating filing of appeal or application for reference by any income-tax authority under the provisions of this Chapter.

    (2) Where, in pursuance of the orders, instructions or directions issued under sub-section (1), an income-tax authority has not filed any appeal or application for reference on any issue in the case of an assessee for any assessment year, it shall not preclude such authority from filing an appeal or application for reference on the same issue in the case of—

    (a) the same assessee for any other assessment year; or

    (b) any other assessee for the same or any other assessment year.

    (3) Notwithstanding that no appeal or application for reference has been filed by an income-tax authority pursuant to the orders or instructions or directions issued under sub section (1), it shall not be lawful for an assessee, being a party in any appeal or reference, to contend that the income-tax authority has acquiesced in the decision on the disputed issue by not filing an appeal or application for reference in any case.

    (4) The Appellate Tribunal or Court, hearing such appeal or reference, shall have regard to the orders, instructions or directions issued under sub-section (1) and the circumstances under which such appeal or application for reference was filed or not filed in respect of any case.

    (5) Every order, instruction or direction which has been issued by the Board fixing monetary limits for filing an appeal or application for reference shall be deemed to have been issued under sub-section (1) and the provisions of subsections (2), (3) and (4) shall apply accordingly.]”

    4. It is not in dispute that the Board's instructions or directions issued to the Income-tax Authorities are binding on those authorities, therefore, the Department ought not to have filed this appeal in view of the provisions of section 268A of the Act, since the tax effect in the instant case is less than the amount prescribed for not filing the appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

    5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Asstt. Cit Range V, ... v. Shri. Krishna Goel P...
    (Sep 9, 2014)