TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CBDT Circular would be applicable to the present appeals of the Department. We accordingly dismiss all the appeals of Revenue without expressing any opinion on merits of the case. The grounds of the Revenue are dismissed. - ITA Nos.106 And 107/RPR/2012, ITA Nos.134 to 137/RPR/2012 - - - Dated:- 7-2-2019 - Shri Anil Chaturvedi, AM And Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, JM For the Assessee : Shri S.R. Rao For the Revenue : Shri P.V. Mishra ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : These bunches of six appeals by the Revenue in case of two different assessee s are emanating out of the order of Commissioner of Income-Tax (A), Central, Raipur for the A.Ys. 2004-05 to 2009-10. 2. The Revenue in ITA No.106/RPR/2012 has raised fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in dispute in the appeals for each assessment year are considered on standalone basis, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT and therefore all the appeals of Revenue are not maintainable. In support of his contention that the tax effect in the appeals have to be considered on a standalone basis for each assessment year, he relied on the decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle Vs. PSI Hydraulics (2014) 226 Taxman 34 (Kar.) which has also been considered by the Bangalore ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Vivek B. Chand (WTA No. 15/Bang/2017 Ors. order dated 06.07.2018). He also placed on record the copy of the aforesaid decisions. He there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue is that since Ld. CIT(A) has passed a consolidated order for more than one assessment year in case of both the Assessee s, therefore, in terms of para 5 of the CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, Revenue can file the appeals even though tax effect is less than monetary limit prescribed by the circular. We find that the issue of filing of appeal by Revenue in case of a consolidated order passed by Appellate Authorities was also considered by the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle Vs. PSI Hydraulics (supra). The Hon ble Karnataka High Court after considering para 5 of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2012 in para 19 of the order held that merely because the authority concerned for judicial c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and common issues in more than one assessment year, appeal shall be filed in respect of all such assessment years even if the tax effect is less than the prescribed of the year(s) in which the tax effect exceeds the monetary limit prescribed. In case where a composite order/judgment involves more than one assessee, each assessee shall be dealt with separately. 17. In case of an assessee, where common order is passed in respect of more than one assessment year, which involves common issues even if in one of the assessment years the tax effect is more than ₹ 10 lakhs, irrespective of the fact that in respect of other assessment years which is part of the common order, the tax effect is less than ₹ 10 lakhs, the revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee has no say in the matter of clubbing of cases and passing of common orders. Merely because the authority concerned for judicial convenience, clubs the cases and pass common order, the assessee should not be denied of the benefit of circular-3/2011 when the tax effect for the assessment year/years the tax effect is less than ₹ 10 lakhs. Therefore, it is to be held that whether it is a solitary order or common order, the assessee should have the benefit of the tax effect less than ₹ 10 lakhs and in all such cases whether it is a part of the common order or a solitary order, the revenue will not be entitled to file an appeal. 7. We find that though the Hon ble Karnataka High Court order in the case of PSI Hydraulics (sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
