TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order dated 1.1.2010 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-31 for the Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee Shri Vijay Reepal Tralshawala pointed out that by Instruction No. 3 dt. 9.2.2011, the monetary limit for filing the departmental appeal before the Appellate Tribunal has been fixed at ₹ 3 lacs i.e. to say that department appeals shall not be filed in cases where the tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Pvt. Ltd.300 ITR 180 relied on by the DR is distinguishable from the facts of the present case. At para 12 page 184 of the decision in the case of Chhajer Packaging Plastics Pvt. Ltd. it has been held as follows: Otherwise also, paragraph 3 of this circular itself saves certain appeals from being obstructed due to financial limits. Paragraph 3 reads : The Board has also decided that in c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the merits. 6. In our opinion the case of CIT Vs Chhajer was with respect to interpretation of 275 (1)(c) of the Act and hence came under the exception clause under the CBDT Circular and was not obstructed by the monetary limit of ₹ 3 laks prescribed by the Circular. Therefore the case of 300 ITR 180 is inapplicable to the facts of our case. Further Instruction No. 5 dt. 15.5.2008 fixing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
