TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elating to assessment year 2006-07 against order passed under section 17 r.w.s. 16(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (in short the Act ). 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CWT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer/ without appreciating the fact Nashik Municipal corporation had granted conditional permission for development in respect of Land at Adgaon at Survey No.556,558/560 567 and therefore, the said land comes under the jurisdiction of the Nashik Municipal Corporation, and hence, it is an 'Urban land'. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CWT(A) erred in not a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tainable because of low tax effect. He further pointed out that the Tribunal in assessee s own case relating to various assessment years have already dismissed the appeals of Revenue on this count. 4. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of Assessing Officer. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The limited issue which arises in the present appeal is the maintainability of appeal filed by the Revenue on account of tax effect. The case of assessee is that where the CIT(A) has passed separate orders and since the tax effect on account of wealth tax demanded excluding the interest charged under section 17B of the Act is less than ₹ 2 lakhs, then the said appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... less than ₹ 2 lakhs. The Revenue has filed appeals against the orders of CWT(A), wherein the tax effect is less than ₹ 2 lakhs and the plea of the assessee before us is that the said appeals are not maintainable in view of the CBDT Instructions issued from date to date, wherein while prescribing the monetary limits for filing the appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the CBDT had also instructed that such monetary limits would apply to other direct tax matters including wealth-tax, gift-tax, estate duty, etc. The first such instruction is Instruction No.1979, dated 27.03.2000 which has been further approved vide CBDT Instruction No.05/2008, dated 15.05.2008. 6. Similar issue arose before the Chennai Bench of T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... particular case. 5. Now the question before us will the above para in the circular enable the Revenue to file an appeal in a wealth-tax matter, even when the tax effect is less than ₹ 3 lakhs mentioned in the said circular? The circular specifically mentions that it is in supersession of earlier Instruction No.5/2008 dated 15.5.2008. A look at CBDT Instruction No.5/2008 dated 15.5.2008 clearly shows that these instructions were issued in supersession of certain earlier instructions on the matter. The instructions which stood superseded by CBDT Instruction No.5/2008 is mentioned at the preamble of the said Instruction itself which reads as under:- Reference is invited to Board s instructions No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CBDT instructions earlier issued, though superseded with regard to income-tax matters, were all issued under powers vested on it under Section 119 of Income-tax Act, 1961. Thus, when it is clearly mentioned in Instruction No.3/2011 that for matters relating to direct tax other than income-tax, relevant provisions of statute and rules will continue to apply, it would by implication means that earlier instructions insofar as it related to matters other than income-tax would continue to apply. By virtue of Instruction No.5/2007 dated 16.7.2007, the monetary limit for filing of appeals before this Tribunal was increased ₹ 1 lakh. By virtue of Instruction No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, the monetary limits mentioned applied also to wealth-tax, g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
