TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by the Board, we find that the Board had issued directions that the appeals will be filed only in cases where the tax effect exceeds Rs.2 lakhs in the matter of High Court in appeals U/s 260A or Reference U/s 256(2). The aforesaid circular is binding on all the authorities under the Board including the appellant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur. - Decided against the revenue. - M.A.I.T. No. 18 of 2005, M.A.I.T. No. 22 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 12-2-2013 - Krishn Kumar Lahoti And M. A. Siddiqui,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Sanjay Lal For the Respondent : Shri Sandesh Jain ORDER These appeals are listed for final hearing. In M.A.I.T.18 of 2005 following substantial questions of law were framed on 6.5.2005 :- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be dismissed only on this ground. He has relied on the two Division Bench judgments of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Suresh Chand Goyal [(2008) 298 ITR 277(MP)] and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ashok Kumar Manibhai Patel Co. [(2009) 317 ITR 386 (MP)] in support of his contention. Shri Lal learned counsel appearing for the appellant though opposed the aforesaid prayer but could not refute the contention of the appellant that by the Board instructions No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, the Board had specifically directed that the Department shall file appeal only in cases where tax effect exceeds monetary limits of Rs.2 lakh in the matter of High Court. The instructions issued by this Board reads thus :- Monetary limits for fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue effect : (i) Where Revenue audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department. (ii) Where the Board's order, notification, instruction or circular is the subject matter of an adverse order. (iii) Where prosecution proceedings are contemplated against the assessee. (iv) Where the constitutional validity of the provisions of the Act are under challenge. 4. Special leave petitions under Article 136 of the Constitution are filed before the Supreme Court only in consultation with the Ministry of Law. Therefore, where the Chief Commissioner decides to contest an adverse judgment by filing special leave petition before the Supreme Court, they should send the proposal to the Board for further processing. 5. These instru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icy decision not to file appeal in a type of case in hand and the same is binding on the Revenue and in the result the appeal was dismissed following the circular. The similar view was taken by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Asst.CIT v. Aradhana Oil Mills [2002]30 ITC 446 and following the circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the appeal was dismissed. In Ashok Manibhai Patel (supra) another Division Bench has also taken similar view. Justice Dipak Misra, as his Lordship then was, speaking for the Bench held thus :- 11. The factual scenario can be perceived from another aspect. Submission of Mr. A.K. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent is that the tax impact is Rs.52,565 and, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi, dated 27th March, 2000; wherein monetary limit for the department for filing reference to the High Court earlier fixed for Rs.50,000/- came to be revised and fresh instructions are issued to file references only in cases where tax effect exceeds Rs.2,00,000/-, are binding on the Department. 4. The above instructions dated 27th March, 2000 reflect the policy decision taken by the Board not to raise questions of law where the tax effect is less than the amount prescribed in the above circular with a view to reduce litigations before High Courts and Supreme Court. The said circular is binding on the Revenue though learned Counsel tried to contend that the said circular is not applicable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny appeal, if tax effect less then Rs.2 lakhs, could not have been filed by the Department. From the perusal of the instructions issued by the Board, we find that the Board had issued directions that the appeals will be filed only in cases where the tax effect exceeds Rs.2 lakhs in the matter of High Court in appeals U/s 260A or Reference U/s 256(2). The aforesaid circular is binding on all the authorities under the Board including the appellant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur. The Board had taken this decision in continuation to earlier directions issued by the Board on 28.10.1992 where the monitory limit was Rs.50,000/-. Now in view of the changed circumstances, as directed by the Board by instruction dated 27.3.2000, it is apparen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
