(JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED BY K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN,J) By formulating the following substantial question of law "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the appeal by the Revenue had to be dismissed merely since the tax effect is less than Rs.2 lakhs, by relying on the circular that governs filing of appeal by the Revenue to the Tribunal and without considering the fact that the present case involves audit objection ?"
the Revenue filed this appeal.
2. The Assessing Officer, while completing the reassessment proceedings under Section 143(3) read with
Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, disallowed/withdrawn 1/4th of the expenses incurred towards insurance/ depreciation on car and interest on car loan, since the assessee himself disallowed 1/4th car maintenance expenses in his return of income. Aggrieved by the disallowance, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who allowed the appeal by holding that the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to reopen and reassess the returns. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which dismissed the appeal on the ground that the tax effect in the case on hand is below the monetary limit fixed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes for filing an appeal before the Tribunal. The correctness of the same is now put in issue in this appeal by the Revenue on the sole ground that it is of-course true that there is a circular fixing the monetary limit for filing an appeal before the Tribunal. But, the circular is not an absolute circular. There are certain exceptions contained therein. One of the exceptions is that if there is an audit objection, the Revenue can file an appeal notwithstanding the fact that the tax effect is less than the monetary limit quoted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue.
4. Though the said argument of the Revenue is interesting to hear, the fact remains that no such argument is appeared to have been advanced before the Tribunal, which is amply evident by a mere reading of the order of the Tribunal. Hence, the question of law formulated does not arise from the order of the Tribunal. While observing that the other remedy is available to the Revenue, the appeal is to be dismissed as the issue of filing of an appeal by the Department before this Court or before the Tribunal when the tax effect is less than the monetary limit fixed in the circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes has been considered by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT Vs Rajasthan Patrika Limited (reported in (2002) 258 ITR 300), by this Court in the case of CWT Vs. S.Annamalai (reported in (2002) 258 ITR 675) and by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Camco Colour Co.
K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN,J AND M.M.SUNDRESH,J RS (reported in 254 ITR 565) as well as in the case of CIT Vs. Pithwa Engg. Works (reported in (2005) 276 ITR 519).
5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as it does not involve any question of law, much less a substantial question of law for consideration.
(K.R.P.J.) (M.M.S.J.) 21.12.2009 Index : Yes Internet : Yes To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai 'D' Bench.
RS TC(A)NO.1135 OF 2009